Only recently, Marc Jacobs’ fragrance campaign was banned for being too naughty and now it’s the turn of Miu Miu to stir up a bout of controversy. Oh dear.
You’ll remember those dreamy images of Hailee Steinfeld showcasing Miuccia Prada’s ‘40s-esque frocks that had us so enthralled? Granted, they provoked criticism that it was “obscene” for a 14-year-old to peddle designer fashion but with her eating pizza and surrounded by glittery heels, the images were far from scandalous. What’s more, there were no provocative poses, no indecent outfits and certainly no bottles poised between her thighs. So what’s the issue?
Well, the Advertising Standards Authority has cracked out its rulebook once again and deemed the ads "irresponsible". Say whaaa? Apparently, the images encourage teens to put themselves in unsafe situations. Uh-huh.
"Because the ad showed Hailee Steinfeld in a potentially hazardous situation sitting on a railway track, we concluded the ad was irresponsible and in breach of the Code in showing a child in a hazardous or dangerous situation," the ASA said in its ruling.
Meanwhile Miu Miu have defended their campaign by saying it was a "serious, high-fashion campaign aimed at adult women." And rather than implying that the Oscar-nominated actress is suicidal and sobbing, the Italian brand argues she looks "wistful and thoughtful."
So what does this mean for Fash Land? Will designers stop using the new breed of chadults to avoid nasty lawsuits? Or will they continue to be creative and risk courting controversy? We can't say we saw the train track image as irresponsible but what say you? Have the ASA gone too far? Or should the ads be sent to the naughty step?
UPDATE: Over on Grazia UK's Facebook page, the battle rages on. Cakes and Tarts says, ‘I don't think this will ever, ever spur an army of 14 year old girls to their nearest (disused) train track to recreate the shoot. We really need to give teenagers more credit and stop this nanny culture we are forcing them into.’ Meanwhile, Sammy Castillo doesn’t ‘understand why such young girls need to be used in the first place for fashion they're obviously not going to wear until they're 30?’.
What's your verdict?