As reported in Jezebel (and elsewhere) The Economist‘s Intelligent Life franchise is running a photo of actress Cate Blanchett sans retouching on the cover of’its current issue.
As can be expected, the decision to present a human being who merely looks like a human being comes with a bit of self congratulation from the editor:
We can’t be too self-righteous about it, because, like anyone else who puts her on a cover, we are benefiting from her beauty and distinction. But the shot is at least trying to reflect real life. It’s a curious sign of the times that this has become something to shout about.
The problem, of course is twofold—all the self congratulation around a single cover is de facto admission that the magazine has Photoshopped in the past and will likely do so again in the future—but more critically, Intelligent Life is is puncturing a myth upon which we are all dependent. If we stop believing in an uber-class of the wealthy, famous and powerful who, in addition to their other gifts, stay eternally young, can the oligarchy be saved? The proletariat will rise up once we stop asking each other if we look fat.
And for what? It would have been so easy, Economist:
Could your point of view be somehow ‘naive’?
The original photo is certainly retouched. But only enough to reflect the article’s idea.
Indeed it is very accurate.
Keeps its goal without damaging the actress reputation.
Very good piece of work.
[...] embargo, nos hemos topado con una crítica un tanto curiosa: en Designing Magazines dicen que jactarse de que aparece sin Pohtoshop es lo mismo que admitir que antes sí que han [...]
I admire the intelligence of The Economist and recently wrote to the publisher’s office suggesting they could enhance its IQ by making the design smarter, less dowdy. I suggested a better design budget might help, and larger and better illustration. I asked them not to send my comments along to the design department because they might be insulted, which wasn’t my intention. I got an offended email back from the design department. I have resigned myself to never working for The Economist, but who knows, maybe they’ll decide to make the magazine look as smart as it is.