The complainant believed that post-production techniques had been used to alter Helen Mirren's appearance, specifically with regards to the lines around her mouth, accusing the ads of being misleadingly exaggerated; although the ASA sided with the cosmetics firm and quashed the complaints.
The TV ad featured the Academy Award winner being offered a seat at a bus stop and looking unhappy, while her voice-over stated, "Ever feel like you go unnoticed? And when you aren't, well, enough".
She continues, "It's the science I trust to help me look like me. Nourish and indulge your skin, and show those age spots who's boss. Grow another year bolder. Look and feel more radiant. Our perfect age is now. So are we worth it? More than ever."
Proof
In response, L'Oreal UK gave the ASA four images of the actress from recent red carpet events and stated that the images of her in the ads were entirely in line with such public appearances when she had been professionally styled and made-up.
The cosmetics maker also stated that no post-production changes were made to Mirren's face in the TV ad, and provided signed affidavits to this effect from the production agencies.
L'Oreal Paris also provided the results of its instrumental and consumer perception testing with regard to the moisture, radiance and age spot reduction claims made in both ads.
‘Not misleading’
The ASA sided with the cosmetics firm, stating that consumers would expect Helen Mirren to have been professionally styled and made-up for the photo shoot, and to have been photographed and filmed professionally in flattering conditions.
In the press ad, the UK watchdog said it understood that some re-touching had been carried out – something that L’Oreal had not denied - but that the changes were minor and did not relate in any way to the claims made for the product.
“We considered this approach was acceptable so long as the resulting effect was not one which misleadingly exaggerated the effect the product was capable of achieving,” says the ASA judgment.
The affidavits provided by the production agency and the recent press images were also deemed satisfactory with the latter being a fair representation of Mirren’s appearance, aiding L’Oreal’s case, particularly as the ASA notes that wrinkles were clearly visible in both ads.
“We therefore considered that the ads had not altered Ms Mirren's appearance in a way that would exaggerate the likely effect that could be achieved by consumers' use of the product, and concluded that the ads were not misleading,” it concluded.