comScore
  1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Jane Dough
  8. The Braiser

Busting bad dish!

Hot Topics Jennifer Lawrence Kim Kardashian Rihanna Robert Pattinson Beyonce Justin Bieber Kristen Stewart

Dakota Fanning Ad Banned for Being Too “Sexually Provocative”

Truth rating: 10

10:34 am, November 9th, 2011

(Juergen Teller)

A perfume ad featuring teen star Dakota Fanning has been yanked in England for being too “sexualised.”

Fanning is the face of Marc Jacobs‘ new fragrance Oh, Lola!, which the designer himself has described as “More of a Lolita than a Lola.”

And it’s precisely that vibe which has caused the ad (see right) to be banned by Britain’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).

After the organization received complaints about Fanning posing with a big bottle between her legs, the ASA had the ad pulled and issued a statement that read: ”We noted that the model was holding up the perfume bottle which rested in her lap between her legs and we considered that its position was sexually provocative.”

“We understood the model was 17 years old but we considered she looked under the age of 16. We considered 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 sexualise a child,” added the statement.

Coty, which manufactures the perfume, defended the ad, noting it that doesn’t show any “private body parts or sexual activity.” While Coty acknowledged the ad was “provoking, ” it felt the shot with Fanning was “not indecent.”

What do YOU think?

Is the ad inappropriate, and should have been yanked?

Follow @GossipCop on Twitter!

Like us on Facebook!

You might like:


  • http://twitter.com/Marti723 Marti Mitev

    Are you f****ng kidding me?! She’s awesome, and no it’s not too sexy!
    She’s 17, gosh! Not 12! 0.0

  • Anonymous

    Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. The sin of mine, the soul of mine.
    Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Loh. Lee. Ta.

  • http://www.facebook.com/foxabdalla Linda Brandi Fox Abdalla

    Imho they need to reshoot that anyway the dress poofs up in the back awkwardly her hair needs to be deep conditioned and brushed to give it a silky look her make up looks like it was done by a 12 year old, need i say more. As for the ad itself, its provacative because the whole shot looks awkward, a huge perfume bottle between your legs isnt really attractive unless your saying your snatch stinks, and the flower on top of the bottle is gaudy~ Hmmm lets see Vaginas have been refered to as flowers , yeah uh they need to rethink that whole ad campaign thats just laziness on the part of whoever designed the shoot.

  • http://twitter.com/Nathiest Nathiest

    I love the fact that it got banned after 4 people filed a complaint. 4!!!

  • Louise hernan

    There’s no way anyone could look at that ad and NOT see that Dakota is being sexualized.

  • armywife

    Where are the parents when these pictures are being taken? I don’t care if she and her sister are actors, they are minors. If someone took a pic like that of my 17 yr. old daughter they’d be in a world of pain.

  • http://twitter.com/Nathiest Nathiest

    Fuck off moralfag.

  • Anonymous

    Lmao! I literally thought I was the only person in the world who thought she looked like she was holding her (excuse my french) flower weiner. But, I GUESS NOT!

  • http://www.facebook.com/laquitathodge Laquita T. Hodge

    I don’t see it as provocative, but that’s just me.

  • YeaSoWhat?

    fuck it. i like dakota but this ad is really blah for her. i can see how its some sexuality in it but nothing too bad. I wish i lived in England theyre more classy the america.

  • Sindee

    So youll let your kids take pictures like this then?

  • Danny

    People are all talking about how Dakota is still young and doing things like this. Have you not seen her movies? She got raped in a movie when she was young, and she kissed Kristen Stewart, did drugs, and dressed provocatively while swearing in The Runaways. She’s covered up in a barely provocative shot in an ad and suddenly she’s too young for this?

  • Anonymous

    I didn’t notice anything sexual about it until they pointed it out. :P

    Talk about dirty minds…what a bunch of perverts! lol

  • www.makeupbuyer.com

    she looks fab

  • Clivusmax

    what a terrible pic, flash shadow, flat lighting, awkward pose, terrible costume and make-up, bad hair day!
    I cant believe Coty paid an ad agency for this abomination.
    Oh and sex has been selling to consumers for centuries with models that look underage ( hello Bebe)

  • Heather

    Have you people seen her in the Runaways movie? She is much more sexualized in that movie. But she is a veteran of the business. She knows what she’s doing. I don’t think its indecent.

  • eks

    aside from emma watson’s recent ads for lancome…dakota’s dress and pose looks to be one of the least provocative perfume ads in the past while.

    but i do agree…this is the ad? it’s so…..unflattering. and the quality of the photo is so….ugh? perhaps it’s a good thing that it’s being pulled lol. dakota is such a pretty girl…i’m SURE they can take better pictures for their ad.

  • pancakes

    The difference is that movies are rated. Ads are shown everywhere.

  • Aemasek

    I think they shot it in a way that’s akin to child pornography, grainy picture on a sheet background, in a white “innocent dress”. It makes her look younger than she is, and the messy hair makes it seem “real”. I personally don’t think Dakota fanning is the issue here, if her parents didn’t stop her, oh well, she is 17 and she took a spokesperson job, whatever. But the ad should be banned because it’s repulsive.

  • Marie88

    I think it looks the way it’s supposed to look- like a perfume ad! She is holding the perfume, she has on a dress with soft tones in order to draw attention to the bottle. I didn’t notice anything wrong with it being in between her legs. Hell, it’s not even really between them. It’s resting on top of the dress. She’s wearing light make up, her face doesn’t have that “come hither” look, or anything like that, and the lighting clearly suggests that your eyes should be going toward the actual product.

    I think she did an awesome job with it, and it’s very Marc Jacob-esc.

  • Marie88

    Exactly what I was thinking!

  • jeppen

    Have you substituted your morality for a legal framework? Who cares if a girl is 17.5 or 18?

  • Guest3

    I understand what they are saying about the ad. First she looks like a child not a 17 yr old and they have her dressed like a child also and they have the bottle sitting at the top of her pubic bone which is suggestive, they could have placed it elsewhere but they didn’t because obviously that’s where they wanted it. As far as the ad it could have been done better in my opinion and I think Dakota is beautiful but they didn’t do her justice in this photo. This ad doesn’t make me want to find out what this perfume is. Now if they had done this ad with a much older model dressed like an adult I think it would have been more readily accepted but I think that it does lean toward sexualising (if that’s a word) a child (not that she is a small child but she definitely looks like one). Redo the ad, even with Dakota just make it in better taste. (And I agree with another reader that they rate movies but not ads and I think that they should)

Abrams Media Network click here for advertising opportunities
X