News

around the web



TMZ Tour
TMZ Tour


Dakota Fanning Ad: Too Racy For The U.K.!

17-year-old Dakota Fanning has managed to keep away from controversy ... until now.

A print ad featuring the teen actress has been banned in Great Britain after being deemed too "sexually provocative." See the full photo below:

1109_dakota_single

In the ad, an innocent-looking Dakota, dressed in a frilly pink dress, holds a giant bottle of Marc Jacobs' Oh, Lola! perfume between her thighs. Four complaints were lodged from readers offended with the ad, which was enough for the Advertising Standard's Authority to pull the campaign.

Here is part of the ASA ruling's (which can be viewed in it's entirety here): "The length of her dress, her leg and position of the perfume bottle drew attention to her sexuality. Because of that, along with her appearance, we considered the ad could be seen to sexualise a child. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible and was likely to cause serious offence."

Coty Inc., the company that manufactures the fragrance, argued it was "provoking, but not indecent" and didn't show any "private body parts or sexual activity." Regardless of their plea, the ASA has banned it from being published in any U.K. publication.

Do you think the ad is too provocative? Vote in our poll below!

Comments (12)

CanadianGal:  1023 days ago

Dear U.K.,

You're lame.

Sincerely,
Canada

Likes 1 Dislikes 3

beyunkahROX:  1023 days ago

It is provocative, understandable where they are coming from.

Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Lirazly:  1023 days ago

hum... provacative??? This coming from the country who started the Skins series?

Likes 1 Dislikes 0

LuvLeeRita:  1023 days ago

She's freakin' 17 years old... HECK YA, IT'S PROVOCATIVE !!!!!!! (and wrong)

Likes 1 Dislikes 0

honey2000:  1023 days ago

The photog should have noticed her elbow double-jointed and adjusted that. The bottle is heavily weighted and up against her vaginal area, very sick and a sad comment on the advertising world today, looking for a shock to $ELL MORE things people DO NOT NEED.

Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Carolyn:  1023 days ago

If she would have been 18, then it would have been fine. She's 17 and underage, so it isn't appropriate.

Likes 0 Dislikes 0

chromedomeboy:  1022 days ago

The British show racier stuff than this in their trashy newspapers. Get real!

Likes 0 Dislikes 0

matt:  1022 days ago

People actually have time to lodge complaints about this nonsense.
You are way too identified with your ego if this photo causes you a problem. Also, it's a photo, people can take from it whatever they choose. If you are offended, that means you find it sexually stimulating. Nothing is happening in the photo, you are using your imagination to make it sexual. You are perverts.
4 people lodged complaints. 4 people got it taken down. Seems like the minority rules here.

Likes 0 Dislikes 2

Evianese:  1022 days ago

I don't think their reasoning explains fully why it is so inappropriate... it is also a flower between her legs.. ready to be deflowered - she's almost o****e.

And, the perfume is called Oh, Lola... not Ooh, lala.. so a Lolita reference in the name.

I think that is what people have a problem with.

I am all about artistic photography, but I can see for parents of young girls - this screams "*** and be my first"

Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Cookie Bell:  1021 days ago

omg my first response would be no, the ad is ok. however, if it is to risky for the child viewers in the UK, what the heck have we done to our children viewers in the US? All we have is sex on tv, from getting bigger ads to real sex. a bit bothering.

ps.that bottle does look like a huge **** ready to go diving lolz xo.

Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Tiffany:  1017 days ago

If you see it as provocative, then you have a dirty mind, it's you not the ad.

Likes 0 Dislikes 0
blog comments powered by Disqus