Trackbacks & Pings

1. This Looks Shopped » Blog Archive » L’OREAL - Was this worth it? on 12 Aug 2008 at 7:17 pm

   […] something was just off in the Elle printing presses. There’s also some good theories over at Racialicious. Tags: Beyonce Knowles, Celebrity Shops, Feria, L’Oreal, photo retouching, Photoshop, skin […]

2. A Pretty Mess » Blog Archive » The Women of Color and Beauty Carnival Is Up! on 14 Aug 2008 at 10:00 am

   […] there was hubalboo on the web about pictures of Beyonce on a L’Oreal ad where her skin had been lightened and her nose had been thinned. Interracial […]

Comments

1. DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

   people should be more outraged at black celebrities like Beyonce and Tyra for brainwashing young black females into believing that it is ideal to have an Euro-centric beauty.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 10:42 am ¶

2. atlasien wrote:

   I just remembered… last year, L’Oréal was fined for racist hiring practices in France.

   “The Paris Appeal Court found that Adecco had complied with what prosecutors said were coded instructions from Garnier to find only young, white women for its counters in the capital.

   The court was shown a Garnier memo requesting “BBR” women - an acronym for “bleu-blanc-rouge” or “blue-white-red”, the colours of the French flag in French.

   Prosecutors said the term was a racist code for excluding black, Arab or Asian women.

   The term is also used in the literature of the far-right National Front party in France.”

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 10:43 am ¶

3. D wrote:

   New reader here, and LOVING your site, just wonderful commentary and insight into lots of different cultures.

   I was about to quote a section of your article on my blog (lemonseeds.wordpress.com) when I saw that someone had pretty much copied and pasted your story into their blog.

   http://multicultclassics.blogspot.com/2008/08/5792-loral-beyonc-and-cultural.html

   Just lettin you know!

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 11:09 am ¶

4. RJG wrote:

   Quite the opposite. L’Oréal should have used Photoshop—to restore the natural skin tone removed by the lighting.

   Once again, talking from a white guy graphic designer who does photo editing at times during the marketing design perspective, so someone else’s reaction to if they were in that situation will most likely vary…

   If someone asked me to do that I would have such a look of horror on my face at the incoming trainwreck I would not even know how to respond and do everything in my power to pass the task to someone else so I could in no way be held responsible for whatever would result from it — no matter how well her skin tone was restored to what it “should” be, I feel that if word ever got out that it happened, the backlash would have been even bigger than just doing a poor job at the lighting.

   I hold lighting tricks a bit differently in terms of “oh god this is a horrible idea” compared to photo manipulations, because at least with lighting tricks it is something real: under certain lighting she does look like X as opposed to just making her look like X because I say so. I could at least then go “but her skin color really did look that way in reality in these settings! I’m not responsible for what skin and light does!”

   That said, I am very interested in what is done differently when shooting for hair coloring depending on ethnicity.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 11:25 am ¶

5. Kandee wrote:

   D,

   Racialicious re-posted this article FROM MultiCultClassics. It says so under the title. Just letting you know…

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 11:53 am ¶

6. RoslynHolcomb wrote:

   My husband is a graphic designer too. He’s white, and he said the exact same thing RJG. He does retouching all the time, including the standard “lose 15 pounds and the double chin” retouch on ALL my photos, but the notion of retouching a black person’s skin freaks him the hell out.

   I doubt that a black graphic designer would feel the same way. Most certainly my husband has fixed things like tan lines in a wedding dress, and given white people a ‘healthy tan.’ It’s more or less standard for him. I guess I understand the political implications, but it would seem that L’oreal might have been in a ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ position.

   Either way, they were in trouble.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 11:53 am ¶

7. Nina wrote:

   On the flip side has anyone seen the Obamas on the cover of Essence magazine? In the picture, Barack has the same chocolate brown complexion as his wife, Michelle. I flipped to the pictures inside the magazine and there Barack’s skintone is lighter than his wife’s which I believe is the case in real life. Could Essence have darkened the presidential hopeful’s skin to appeal to their readers? Or again is this just a lighting issue?

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 12:10 pm ¶

8. cacy wrote:

   Loreal is blogging now? Seems like it.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 12:41 pm ¶

9. Alexandra wrote:

   @cacy Co-signed
   Huh..so I guess Loreal gets a pass because they were “clueless”, well I guess I stop being offended a clueless hurtful racist things from now on. Wheew that’s a big relief, really good to know.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 12:48 pm ¶

10. Donna wrote:

    I wish I could remember where I read it, I think it was Renee at Womanist Musings. Anyway what I read is, isn’t it strange using a woman with a weave (fake hair in the first place) to sell hair color? Is Loreal coloring her weave? Or is it false advertising to say her wig is Loreal’s creation when it’s not?

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 1:13 pm ¶

11. Cheryl Lynn wrote:

    I’m surprised someone would call L’Oréal culturally clueless considering the very adept way they exploit colorism in order to sell skin lightening creams. It seems like they would have to be very much in touch with various cultures around the world in order to do that.

    http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/07/skin-and-color-of-money.html

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 1:28 pm ¶

12. sylvie wrote:

    “SoftSheen-Carson has to settle for Kelly Rowland.” Ha!

    Looking at l’oreal’s other hair ads, the lighting is always that bright, regardless if its beyonce or scarlet johanssen in the photo.

    i also find it interesting that the appearance of lighter skin is freaking people out but not so much the blond, straightened hair which beyonce sports on her own in everyday life.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 1:54 pm ¶

13. Celeste wrote:

    @ Donna: yeah, WTF is up with selling dye for wigs/weave? Do people buy wigs/weave and then dye them the perfect shade or something. I would just buy the wigweave in whatever color I like. There’s a difference between getting an Aaliyah weave which was the color and shade of her own hair and a Beyonce weave which doesn’t reflect much on her real hair (whenever it may decide to make an appearance).

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 2:30 pm ¶

14. jetessence wrote:

    There is an interesting post on ybf that shows the controversial ad in Essence mag. That pic actually looks like Beyonce, and I have a sneaky feeling that it is closer to the original non-photoshopped image.

    check here: http://theybf.com/2008/08/12/here-we-go-again-5/

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 3:30 pm ¶

15. Mike Belgrove wrote:

    dag. white Beyonce is weak.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 3:44 pm ¶

16. exhausted wrote:

    Tee hee hee!!! In the title of this post, I just caught all the accent marks in the word “Cluéléssnéss”!! Very cute!!

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 3:56 pm ¶

17. RJG wrote:

    @jetessence:

    It’s possible that the two magazine ads were just printed differently. Depending on paper quality / how much of the paper content is from recycled materials / ink levels at the press / the magazine being a glossy or not, the way an ad looks in one magazine can be phenomenally different than the way the same exact ad looks in another.

    I’m not saying I’m 100% certain this is the case, but I know from my own experiences that I’ve seen things I’ve made look way different based on who prints them and on what.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 4:23 pm ¶

18. BlackStocking wrote:

    I’m sure you are being “tongue in cheek,” but “settle for Kelly Rowland” went over like a lead balloon to me. Kelly is abeautiful woman and in my and my husband’s opinion actually more appealing to the eye than Beyonce.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 4:55 pm ¶

19. misha wrote:

    I just want to know why is it that ” people should be more outraged at black celebrities like Beyonce and Tyra for brainwashing young black females into believing that it is ideal to have an Euro-centric beauty.” ?
    It is not their fault that they are light-skinned. I know that they had some work done on their noses and all, but overall, that is hardly noticeable. I am also a light-skinned, mixed woman with “naturally” Euro-centric features, and I always feel a bit guilty for the way I and other girls like myself look. I think all women, and Black women in particular are beautiful. I have never thought I was better or more attractive than a dark-skinned woman. Again, I think that is exactly what our racist, white forefathers had in mind when devising methods of dividing people within the same culture/ethnicity. Overall, I think Beyonce and Tyra and many others are beautiful, fixed or not

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 4:55 pm ¶

20. Alexandra wrote:

    @jetessence
    Oh wow that’s a big difference if the ad they showed in Essence mag was the original, I be more likely to believe it was just the lighting gone wrong/”honest mistake”. The other picture really looks deliberately lightened now I can’t wait to see what L’Oreal says about this and I don’t want to hear it was a printing error.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 6:07 pm ¶

21. ashley wrote:

    1. beyonce is OBVIOUSLY so much lighter than shes ever appeared.
    2. in the essence magazine version of the ad everything (hair, face, shadows, clothes) appears to be darker, as if a filter was put on it to make her lighter in the other ads.
    3. a day after this story broke i was at the store buying hair dye and i noticed that other hair dye boxes had girls that had been retouched. one in particular had a very dark skinned woman and on another box she had been lightened, and not ‘printing error’ light, but photoshopped, because her clothes and hair were the same color, but her face and lips had bene lightened.

    I HAVE CONCLUDED: that the photo was retouched. it seems to be an industry standard that has been overlooked until it happened to beyonce.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 6:30 pm ¶

22. Lola wrote:

    I”m NOT buying their excuses. And I do believe they had the darker (original) version for Essence Mag, and the lighter one for the mainstream readers. L’Oreal ppl aren’t beginners, they’ve worked with blacks before, worked with Beyonce before, they KNOW what they’re doing.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 7:09 pm ¶

23. RJG wrote:

    @Alexandra’s “I don’t want to hear it was a printing error.”:

    Why? The ink saturation on a high paper weight glossy is much much much better than the ink saturation on a low-weight matte, or something made of mostly recyclable paper. And that doesn’t even take into account that L’Oreal isn’t responsible for printing the ads.

    on the YBF ad comparison, the entire first image looks more ink saturated than the second one. I would definitely be interested in knowing where the second ad was scanned from in that comparison, since I’m very sure that Essence is a glossy mag.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 7:34 pm ¶

24. Black Canseco wrote:

    All,

    I consider HighJive to be a friend. He’s an industry colleague as well. While I disagree with his theory that L’Oreal’s intent was more about cluelessnes and less about bias and greed and self-indusced mypopia I always appreciate his insights as a fellow industry insider.

    There are very few Blacks, hispanics and Asians in the industry. but for those of us who are (HighJive and myself included), we consistently discuss and scream and challenge these issues consistently, not just online but in boardroom meetings, with clients and with our mainstream colleagues in the industry. Power, cultural arrogance, bias and myopia (of which the marketing world is rife with)
    is a difficult thing to beat, but we fight.

    Like myself, HJ is the last one to make excuses for the industry’s continued bias and cultural stupidity.

    Still, HJ raised some great points that only someone with a career in the business could raise. Recognizing this I can’t discount out of hand everything he wrote. I can disagree based on having worked on haircare clients as well and seen more blatant and intentional.

    When someone on the inside says, “this is how it works” you don’t have to believe every word that comes out of their mouth or their pen, but please consider the very real possibility that they may be a little more versed on what’s going on than you.

    I think one of the reasons many in the business don’t come forward on issues like this is because as difficult as it is to fight these daily fights with images, cultural-as-capital, etc. is that the struggle gets compounded by folks with no experience in the industry dismissing their insights out of hand in favor of speculation from academia, critics and assorted pundits whose opinions we’re more comfortable with.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 8:27 pm ¶

25. Marla wrote:

    Hello,

    Donna made an EXCELLENT point…or read an excellent point about Loreal using a woman with a weave to sell their hair dye. This statement made me smile.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 8:37 pm ¶

26. jaden_loves wrote:

    I think we are forgetting that Beyonce in almost every ad or article she has been in has been made to look like a white woman.I don’t care what excuses are being made by this company, they were unjust in their actions, no matter how her skin was lightened.If this was just a minor mistake, why is it this ad that its just now being done to? Why did they forget to photoshop the image THIS time?

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 8:54 pm ¶

27. Tiffany wrote:

    “Again, I think that is exactly what our racist, white forefathers had in mind when devising methods of dividing people within the same culture/ethnicity.”

    That is exactly the reason why they mixed into blacks in the 1st place so that they could divide us.

    Divide and Concuer

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:29 pm ¶

28. Prometheus wrote:

    Of course it’s retouched but not to the extent to which we all think. Just look at these pictures of Bey a few months ago, maybe around the time this photo was taken.

    http://blacksnob.blogspot.com/2008/08/beyonces-michael-jackson-syndrome.html

    L’Oreal did nothing wrong in this specific case. But, overall the issue is within ourselves and our insecurities about lightness/darkness.

    If you are that bothered by Beyonce’s and Tyra’s choice to wear “Euro” weave and their light skin, then don’t consume their products and educate the community that ANY shade of skin is beautiful.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 1:07 am ¶

29. Katie wrote:

    “Cultural cluelessness” does seem like a bit of a euphemism to me.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 7:24 am ¶

30. Michelle wrote:

    Good point Black Conseco.

    You are right, there are many things that we don’t know and it is easier to see the situation in black and white than to give a big bad corp like L’oreal the benefit of the doubt.

    Beyonce, like most Black people, looks lighter and brighter in some pics, and browner and bronzer in some. But, I think that these issues of beauty and color always sit just under the surface, like festering boils, and they explode when they are agitated.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 7:57 am ¶

31. Kmoney wrote:

    The fact that the ad was darkened for the cover of Essence leads me to believe this was no error. But no, i don’t think L’Oreal did this covertly. They seemed pretty overt about it to me.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 8:16 am ¶

32. Diana wrote:

    However it happened, conscious or unconscious, intentional or not, it’s just wrong. Regular women, and women of color especially, are always struggling with self-image issues. This white-washed Beyonce does nothing to boost the esteem of brown girls. That’s the problem.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 9:08 am ¶

33. JustThinkin wrote:

    I find it interesting that Beyonce is being persecuted for wearing a weave. Think about it. All those eyelash commercials are done by women who have false individual lashes strategically placed. And what do they say, “Soft, lucious lashes.” Secondly, the issue of using light black women is nothing new for an industry that has made white the epitome of beauty.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 12:49 pm ¶

34. Persia wrote:

    It’s possible that the two magazine ads were just printed differently. Depending on paper quality / how much of the paper content is from recycled materials / ink levels at the press / the magazine being a glossy or not, the way an ad looks in one magazine can be phenomenally different than the way the same exact ad looks in another.

    Someone at Essence could also have thought Beyoncé looked waaaay too light, figured it was a mistake in the ad, and darkened it.

    I’d also like to point out that describing L’Oréal’s actions as ignorance rather than malevolence is by no means excusing their actions, and I certainly didn’t think that was HighJive’s point. (Their discriminatory hiring practices make me wonder if it really was ignorance, but that’s another story.)

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 3:09 pm ¶

35. Marge Twain wrote:

    I am confused. If the bright lights used to shoot hair ads are to blame for lightening Beyonce’s skin, why have I seen many print and television ads featuring Scarlett Johanssen, Penelope Cruz, Andie MacDowell, Laeticia Casta and other white women where their skin color looks true to life or darker and their hair still looks luminous? Why can’t Bey have shiny hair and look like herself? In the racist society we live in it seems more likely to me that they wanted her to have lighter skin for broader appeal.

    Re: using a woman with a weave to sell haircolor: Sure Beyonce wears a weave, but so do a large number of white celebrities, some of whom appear in haircolor ads. It’s the only way their hair can handle the stress of all that heat styling and color-switching and remain healthy looking. As JustThinkin points out, mascara ads all use false lashes. Images of lip products all erase the natural lip crinkles and no model or actress actually uses at-home haircolor. They create an image that women consumers will want to recreate, even though the image is unreal.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 4:06 pm ¶

36. Marge Twain wrote:

    DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:
    “people should be more outraged at black celebrities like Beyonce and Tyra for brainwashing young black females into believing that it is ideal to have an Euro-centric beauty.”

    I think this is way off base. When I was younger I remember being resentful of Tyra thinking she looked like a black barbie doll, until I read an interview with her where she talked about all the racism she faced in the industry, how many jobs were closed to her because of her race. Light-skinned black women aren’t the ones setting the limits. In a small but important way, they are expanding the standard of beauty, as much as they are able, while still facing racism themselves.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 4:35 pm ¶

37. Michelle wrote:

    Is Tyra really light-skinned? I guess when I think of light-skinned I think of people who are like Lena Horne or Paula Patton. Someone like Tyra (even Beyonce, depending on the day or the shot) is not a woman whose skin is the color of most White women. No, she isn’t Alex Wek, but she is the same color as Toni Braxton or Janet Jackson or countless regular brown Black girls.

    I think that holding up women who are the color that Beyonce is in that ad is destructive because it mimics the color of a White woman, not a Black woman that the majority of young Black girls can identify with. For the record, I am not saying that brown girls can’t identify with very light skinned women, but I do think that against the backdrop of beauty, including brown women is helpful. I guess I look at Tyra and I see a brown face and a WHOLE LOTTA weave.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 7:36 pm ¶

38. Squidfly wrote:

    Marge Twain wrote:
    I think this is way off base. When I was younger I remember being resentful of Tyra thinking she looked like a black barbie doll, until I read an interview with her where she talked about all the racism she faced in the industry, how many jobs were closed to her because of her race. Light-skinned black women aren’t the ones setting the limits. In a
    small but important way, they are expanding the standard of beauty, as much as they are able, while still facing racism themselves.

    As if Beyonce’s Daddy didn’t go over that contract with a fine tooth comb. Beyonce’s organization has final say. The fact is they do not care as long as they get paid.

    Beyonce should have used Robert Downey Juniors make artist from “Tropic…”

    Then again, she would’ve had to have had an opinion…about something.

    I dis

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 9:56 pm ¶

39. Meera wrote:

    I was an art director at Essence in the late 90’s, doing the beauty pages for the mag from concept to completion.

    There is so much that goes into these shoots, from the time they’re conceived to the final sign off on press. In fact, every magazine has individual final say on the overall color of their ads.

    It’s obvious that very strong lights were used here, to give Beyonce that ethereal glow that is on every other ad for Feria. You know, branding, the part where the dollars come in.

    It’s obvious that Beyonce appears lighter than usual, but nothing like a white woman to me - for God’s sake, she’s not Jennifer Beals.

    And looking at the Essence ad, vs. the others its quite obvious that the production directors who signed off on the ads at press let their own $.02 about beauty standards play a role here - Essence probably going a little darker on purpose (not in Photoshop, but on press), the Elles and Allure leaving it alone because it looked “good” by their standards. Pretty for a black girl, right?

    We don’t know Beyonce’s politics, whether she approved of an initial “blonde goddess” concept or not to begin with - or signed off on the finished product at the end (or had one of her people do it). We don’t know if the Photoshop guy fell asleep at the wheel. Hell for all we know, there could be some French guy in a white KKK robe in front of a Mac behind a big magic curtain laughing his ass of at black people…right?

    All we can be sure of is that both black folks and white people alike have a lot of pain behind the issue of skin color and mental retouching to do on ourselves. I think we should start there.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 12:15 am ¶

40. b-man wrote:

    OK. Did anyone see Dreamgirls? I recall Beyonce looking very pale. Why are people so shocked that a mixed-race Beyonce might have pale skin?

    Hello! Has anyone seen a picture of her mother or her nephew?

    Look, I’m mixed-race. In the summer, I’m brown. In the winter, I’m yellow.

    Those are the facts.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 9:50 am ¶

41. lechatnoir wrote:

    It seems to me most black women at least those who posted have a skewed perception of what black colour is.

    -both Lena Horne and Paula Patton are biracial NOT lightskinned.These women are not black .

    -lighskinned blacks are basically blacks of full African heritage .
    And to the question whether Beyonce is light skinned , yes SHE IS . and she is not a mixed race girl she is completely black.

    -There are quite a few light skin tones, not just one.

    -black people do not tan, they don’t “blush” either lol! we do not fade , we do no “darken” up either. It is one colour for life .

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 3:55 pm ¶

42. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @lechatnoir -

    Uh…no.

    I am not sure how Lena Horne would identify today, but back then she didn’t have a choice. Black was it. Paula Patton is a biracial black woman. I also am not sure how she identifies but she can claim whatever she wants.

    And who doesn’t tan?

    *looks at arms, legs, and flip-flopped feet.* I didn’t think black girls blushed either, but some of us do. Some of us also tan. I even know black women who use self-tanner and bronzer.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 4:00 pm ¶

43. Marge Twain wrote:

    lechatnoir, by chance do you stay indoors all year? I’m not black, I’m dark brown Indian, and I keep two shades of foundation for my summer and winter colors. All human skin has the same structure. Moreover, phenotypically black Americans do not, for the most part, have full African heritage. Mixing has been going on for centuries and what we call “mixed” is relative.

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 1:57 am ¶

44. lechatnoir wrote:

    at Latoya,

    Paula can identify as black, her other choice will be mixed .she is no different then Rashida Jones . they should be compared within their own ethnic “cast” not with the rest of black women.

    at Marge,

    I spend 5 months in a tropical country every year and I work in a plantation most times ( for real) I cut Sugar cane under the hottest sun and even at sunset my skin remain as dark as that of Denzel. I work with 4 very light skinned male cousins their skin never “fluctuates”, by reading some of the post here and other blogs you would think black people are chameleons lol!

    admiture is just one explanation of an extra variety of skin.People completely ignore the fact that there many lighter complected people in Africa. They are only interested in the usual Beyonce-Alek wek comparison.

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 7:02 pm ¶

45. DivergentDana wrote:

    I’m non-mixed black, brown-skinned, and I tan. I spent most of my youth indoors, so I didn’t find out until I took off my watch one day in college. My skin also takes on a sallow tone in the winter.

    I play around with Photoshop, and it’s a very powerful image modification tool. If L’Oreal wanted to, they definitely had the option of darkening/lightening her skin alone, instead of the entire image as is being alleged. And anyone who’s somewhere between onyx and alabaster-colored can indeed take on a range of shades due to lighting alone. Oftentimes, during the retouching process, Photoshop is used to “revive” the skintone from the effect of glaring lights.

    http://glennferon.com/portfolio1/portfolio09.html

    The graphic design people may have failed to do this.

    Posted 16 Aug 2008 at 3:06 am ¶

Post a Comment