Banned, Nivea ad that made model of 62 look younger: Watchdog bans advert after it misled customers over effects of using anti-ageing cream

Advertising Standards Authority says ad uses too much digital airbrushing

Model Cindy Joseph has boasted in interviews: 'What you see is what you get'

Print ad has now been banned

The smiling model in the advert for the Nivea Vital anti-age cream looked remarkably youthful for her 60-plus years.

But for a few crow’s feet around her eyes and the hint of a crease on her forehead, she might easily have passed for 20 years younger.

In fact the image had been so comprehensively retouched and digitally enhanced that it bore little resemblance to the real woman.

Before... American model Cindy Joseph, 62, who did not start modelling until she was 49 and has boasted that 'what you see is what you get'

Now the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned the print advert on the basis that it was misleading and exaggerated the effect of using the cream.



The American model, Cindy Joseph, has been presented as a champion of older women. The 62-year-old did not start modelling until she was 49 and has boasted in interviews that ‘what you see is what you get’.

However, the reality of modern marketing is that virtually no advertising image escapes the digital scalpel to remove imperfections.

The press ad for Nivea Vital, which is sold by Boots at £8.66 for a 50ml jar, included the claim that it ‘reduces all major signs of mature skin ageing’ and that it ‘visibly reduces wrinkles, improves firmness and helps prevent age spots’.

...And after: Miss Joseph as she appeared in the anti-age cream advert, which has been banned by the Advertising Standards Authority

Alongside the beaming, perfect image of the older woman, the claims went further: ‘Vital Anti-Age Cream – Visibly Reduces Wrinkles, Improves Firmness and Helps Prevent Age Spots’.



The pack stated: ‘Reduces all major signs of mature skin ageing' and 'G ives mature skin the extra care it deserves'.

But an ASA investigation following a complaint found the image was created through computer trickery rather than using the cream.



The ASA said the manufacturer, Beiersdorf of Germany, had failed to provide evidence to back up the many claimed effects of using the moisturising cream.

In a damning assessement of the ad, the authority said: ‘We considered that the image of the older model, who was in the centre of the shot, had undergone extensive retouching resulting in substantial changes to the model’s appearance.



‘Lines and wrinkles on her face, particularly around the eye and mouth area, had been dramatically reduced, and several age spots had been removed.

Misleading: A 2010 Advert for Nivea Visage Q10 which was banned by the ASA

‘In the absence of evidence demonstrating that that effect was in line with that which could be achieved through use of the product, we concluded that the ad misleadingly exaggerated the performance of the product in relation to the claims ‘anti-age’.

A Nivea spokesman said: ‘We regret the fact that this image has been considered misleading, as this was never our intention.’

This was not the first time Nivea has fallen foul of advertising rules. In 2010 the ASA banned a cinema ad for ‘Nivea Visage Anti-Wrinkle Q10 Plus’ for giving the misleading impression that 37 per cent of women using the cream felt more beautiful than they had when they were ten years younger.



Campaign: MP Jo Swinson says excessive airbrushing puts pressure on women to achieve impossible ideals

Other beauty brands have been found guilty of manipulating images to exaggerate their anti-ageing effects.



In 2009, a magazine advertisement for Olay Regenerist Definity Eye Illuminator was banned after an image of the model Twiggy, who was 60 at the time, was airbrushed to soften the wrinkles around her eyes.



Two years ago, an ad for ‘Teint Miracle’ foundation by the L’Oreal brand Lancôme was criticised by the ASA for manipulating of images of the actress Julia Roberts.

It was banned, along with another featuring Christy Turlington for a Maybelline foundation on the grounds of excessive airbrushing.



The Lib-Dem MP and Consumer Affairs minister, Jo Swinson, has campaigned against the use of airbrushing in marketing, claiming it puts unfair pressure on women.



Before joining the Government, she said: ‘We believe in the freedom of companies to advertise but we also believe in the freedom of women to be as comfortable as possible with their bodies.

