Dishonest Advertising

This has got to be the single most annoying thing in beauty advertising. If companies are going to use false eyelashes when advertising eyelash products, then they should be advertising false lashes, not the mascara hidden underneath it. I (and I suspect, most people) are aware that there is a fair bit of photoshopping and trickery going on in ads; whitening toothpaste advertised on people with whitened teeth or by use of ps; skin enhanced digitally for foundation and various other things, which if being used when another thing is being advertised e.g. whitened teeth when they are selling lipstick etc is absolutely fine but it isn't when the product being advertised is being linked to these effects, especially where the disclaimer does not make it clear* that you will not get these effects from that product.

This is seriously one of the reasons I don't tend to buy anything I can't test or find reviewed and swatched on an independent blog, I reason that if someone has had to put their hand in their pockets and paid for a product they didn't like they will be honest about it, not something you will ever expect get from the big companies who will of course tell you their product is amazing and you need it in order to ensure the continuing advertising revenue. Magazines are usually not much better. Makeup Forever released an unretouched ad this year and the models foundation looked amazing and whilst she was probably chosen for having amazing, flawless skin it was hers and not courtesy of post-production.  I don't think anyone could claim that this has harmed their business.

I am not anti-photoshop, I do use it myself but not to change the product or how it looks (I will cover up spots when swatching lipstick but not foundation or face products).

*Meaning the disclaimer is either non existent or hidden down at the bottom or in a corner.