Dakota Fanning's Marc Jacobs Ad Banned for Being Too Racy

11/09/2011 at 12:00 PM ET

Dakota Fanning Oh, Lola
Courtesy Marc Jacobs

Dakota Fanning‘s latest role has received a big thumbs-down in the U.K.

The actress’s recent magazine ad for Marc Jacobs’s Oh, Lola! perfume is too suggestive, Britain’s advertising watchdog has ruled, and must be pulled immediately, the BBC reports.

The ad in question shows the 17-year-old American actress in a thigh-length dotted dress with an oversize flower-topped bottle of Oh, Lola! resting between her legs.

The U.K.’s Ad Standards Authority determined that “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 sexualize a child.”

The ASA ruled that the ad was irresponsible, likely to cause “serious offense,” and must not appear again.

Coty UK, the maker of the perfume, had argued that the image was “provoking but not indecent.” On Tuesday, Marc Jacobs released a statement, calling the banning “unfortunate.” He wrote:

“It was our pleasure to work with Dakota Fanning for the Oh, Lola! campaign. She is a smart, pretty, interesting, talented young woman and we would never have suggested an advertising concept that we thought was inappropriate. I believe she is also very thoughtful about the projects she takes on and would not have done something that she felt was in questionable taste. It’s really unfortunate that people have taken anything negative from what we believe is a really good campaign and one that so perfectly embodies the fragrance.” Tell us: Do you think Fanning’s ad is too racy for print?

–Tim Nudd

SHOP STARS’ SIGNATURE SCENTS

Share this story:

Your reaction:

Add A Comment

Got something to add to this post? Fill out the fields below to make a comment, ask a question or share a tip. We'd love to hear from you.

Note: If this is your first time commenting on Style News Now, your comment will need to be approved by our moderator before it will appear. Thanks for your patience, and check back again soon.

Showing 339 comments

CG on

Uh, it is provocative. It is just implied. Not only is the bottle positioned at her genital area, she is leaning on a invisible, bed-like surrounding–in a manner as though she is on a bed. . . Moreover, she has a “come hither” expression on her face. This is all quite obvious–if not symbolic of sexuality (metaphorical of it as well). I will not even go into what the perfume bottle can symbolize. . . And, with that huge flower on top of it. . . And, how the dress is just slightly raised at her thigh. . . Uh, the posing is rather strategic. . . Plus, there’s pink as the ultimate, romantic color–among other things that it can symbolize. . .

LaKeesha Wherry on

The dress is ok…she has on stockings….but, I would not have positioned the bottle between her legs…maybe under her arm or on her side.

Rachel on

Duh!!! She’s dressed as a child, exemplifying her purity, but with a huge bottle of flowers on her crotch. Hasn’t anyone heard the saying “being deflowered?!” It’s clearly portraying a child, dangling her virginity!

Caroline on

I’m glad to see that there are intelligent people in UK. Good Job.

Deneen on

She still looks like she is 12. Other than money, why would she pose like that and why would her parents let her? Stuff like this is why perverts prevail.

Paula on

I think the pose and the position of the bottle is absolutely inappropriate and uncalled for due to the age of Dakota. I am amazed that her parents would allow the use of this picture in any ad campaign. I guess money talks no matter what the actress has to do to get it.

Marylou on

why don’t they just title it “deflower me”

Stephanie on

Definitely inappropriate. Good for the UK! It’s so sad that so many of these young Hollywood stars start out so sweet and then almost invariably end up being sexualized at a very young age. They almost invariably do some racy, pornographic thing. I don’t think THIS photo is necessarily pornographic, but it’s definitely inappropriate, definitely highly suggestive, and I do fear that it’s just the beginning of a long sexual path for Miss Dakota. It’s tragic, really, what Hollywood does to our Youth.

dawn on

not racy at all .. i have seen worse on cover’s.

mimi on

it’s not “racy” but it is inappropriately suggestive.

getting a teenager, making her look younger, getting a flower shaped bottle between her legs.. you dont have too read between the lines (or legs) too much to see what this actually insinuates.

dont be fooled, the creative directors knew what they were doing in order to get a little attention.

Next | 1 … | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | … 34 | Next | Show All
advertisement

From Our Partners

From Our Partners

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,812 other followers

Sign up for our daily newsletter and other special offers.
    Choose your newsletters
Thank you for signing up! Your request may take up to one week to be processed.
    see all newsletters