Airbrush wand used to much in make-up product commercials and photos?

   Is airbrushing overpowering the make-up industries and what it can actually do for the costumer? Make-up companies try to trick the costumer that their foundation makes them look flawless, their eyelashes look longer and their lipstick so pure. Are companies trying to hard to get costumers to buy their flawless product? The companies draw the costumers to buy their products but 20 years a go when their wasn't airbrush, you had access to see what the make up actual did. 
   Well if you feel the same way as I do; they are pushing the airbrushing to far, you are not alone. The British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) feels the same, they are now cracking down on companies that are using the "airbrushing wand" a little to much. A culprit of this is Julia Roberts on the L'Oreal commercial and photos in magazines for L'Oreal foundation. L'Oreal admitted to retouching the pictures of Julia but said that their foundation can produce perfect skin. Then if it generates perfect skin why would you airbrush still? Julia Roberts is gorgeous as it is and make up can only make her look better, you don't need airbrush to perfect her (if their is perfecting). You do not want to mislead the costumer because then they will stop buying your product after they figure out their skin doesn't look perfect with the make-up. Say a make-up company comes out with a new product;swear they did not use airbrush and only displayed their product on the celebrity, I bet that their product will still look good. I personally would buy it just for their honestly and how good it looks (well hopefully). Is airbrushing misleading costumers into being flawless like celebrities? What is crossing line in this situation? 


For the full story go to http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/loreal-ads-of-julia-roberts-and-christy-turlington-banned-for-airbrushing-2516498/ 


“I don't do fashion, I am fashion.” 
Coco Chanel