Germany may add beauty filter labels to social media influencers.

[williamcll]

Beauty filters are common in many streaming or video sharing applications/websites, now German officials want this to be more transparent

Quotes

Quote

German state officials said Friday that they want advertisers and social media influencers to label any photos that have used so-called beauty filters. Critics argue that the filters, which offer easy ways to touch up images and remove supposed blemishes, promote unrealistic standards of beauty particularly among women and girls.

 

A majority of officials from Germany’s 16 states want the federal government to come up with legislation that would require the labeling of images and videos where beauty filters were used to enhance a person’s face, skin or hair. This would apply to commercial advertising and influencers with a significant number of followers, Fegebank was quoted as saying.

 

My thoughts

This will help with a lot of poor beauty standards but also at the same time someone is going to complain about privacy or marketing.

 

Sources

https://apnews.com/article/technology-social-media-fc693b3be6a7670d484ada93b50e78ac

[saintlouisbagels]

Would it really harm privacy to add a label indicating a filter was used?
VSCO already tags photos with what filter was used, and obviously Instagram already implements <Sponsored> posts.

[SansVarnic]

19 minutes ago, williamcll said:

someone is going to complain about privacy

I fail to see how this would affect privacy. It's not talking about blurring out faces, it's about beauty filters, a bit of a leap in logic.

[Levent]

Makes sense to be honest. Everyone is using all the makeup and filters to make themselves look like 2000s anime character nowadays. However, I doubt it will have the impact on self-esteem they are looking for. Using a third party app then posting is still possible.

[Sauron]

I suppose it makes sense but... what counts as a "beauty filter"? Most forms of image editing aim to make the picture look better, even if they don't change the subject's proportions or change their features. I don't see any downsides for commercial advertising (might as well put the label on all of them) but for social media posts there might be a grey area.

[Spotty]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I don't see any downsides for commercial advertising (might as well put the label on all of them) but for social media posts there might be a grey area.

The line between commercial advertising and social media posts is basically non-existent now. So many social media posts are sponsored advertisements. It makes sense to me that if a social media influencer is advertising something like concealer makeup and is using photo editing/filters to adjust their face to appear more beautiful or hide blemishes on their skin then that could be misleading and perhaps it should be disclosed. There's probably less of an argument to be made for somebody like Linus advertising a computer keyboard and needing to disclose if the image used a beauty filter/editing, but the problem is that you can't trust advertisers/influencers to do it when it makes sense for the product they are advertising (advertising beauty products, etc) as if it's not required they simply won't do it.

Though, you may be considering such social media influencer advertising as commercial advertising (and I believe it is) so the point may be mute. The article does state that it will apply to influencers with a "significant amount of followers" so it seems like it would only apply to large "influencer" social media accounts, who typically do take sponsorship/advertisement deals, and not just regular social media users. Maybe it would make sense to make the filter disclosure requirement apply to any social media posts that are part of a paid advertisement deal, which would allow large influencers to still use filters on non-sponsored posts without disclosing.

 

Quote

Critics argue that the filters, which offer easy ways to touch up images and remove supposed blemishes, promote unrealistic standards of beauty particularly among women and girls.

I'm not really that convinced that adding "#filter" or "#edited" to a social media post would make much difference with the whole unrealistic standards for women issue the article mentions, but I'm neither a woman or somebody who spends time browsing mainstream social media so that's a problem that I'm unfamiliar with.

[Mihle]

A law that require retouched humans in ads and posts with advertising on social media to be marked with a stamp, went in to effect this month here in Norway.

 

Maybe the system to hit down on it isn't perfect but I agree with the law.

[Rauten]

Without knowing all gritty details of the law, this seems like a good thing to me.

Probably not the best possible solution, but it's a step in the right direction at the very least. They should bring this idea to the whole EU.

[Spotty]

12 minutes ago, Mihle said:

A law that require retouched humans in ads and posts with advertising on social media to be marked with a stamp, went in to effect this month here in Norway.

Do you have any examples of what Norway's system looks like on social media posts? Is it a disclosure in the description or is it superimposed over the image itself? I found plenty of news articles discussing Norway implementing the law but couldn't find any examples actually showing what it looks like.

[PeachGr]

Some of us are older and you were here before Instagram and other social media, so we  can see the difference between real and take. But some teens have grew up in an era where those things existed, and the probably can't see those things, because they don't really have a reference without that

[Arika]

can we do the same for makeup?

 

also to anyone that believes that anything with #nofilter is actually unedited, i would like to sell you some magic beans.

[Mihle]

1 hour ago, Spotty said:

Do you have any examples of what Norway's system looks like on social media posts? Is it a disclosure in the description or is it superimposed over the image itself? I found plenty of news articles discussing Norway implementing the law but couldn't find any examples actually showing what it looks like.

The system is really that the creator is supposed to mark the image itself with a published symbol, be it an ad somewhere or paid social media post. (There isn't a requirement for posts that aren't paid for in any way from my understanding) there is exception for changing the colour of hair/eyes/teeth, but if you edit the skin or form of the body then it's required.

 

Here is an example one Norwegian article has in it: 

 

Article in Norwegian:

https://www.nrk.no/kultur/na-kan-du-fa-bot-for-a-publisere-redigerte-bilder-1.16023983

[Sauron]

2 hours ago, Spotty said:

Though, you may be considering such social media influencer advertising as commercial advertising (and I believe it is) so the point may be mute.

Sure, if there's an advertisement contract then it should always be disclosed.

[SimplyChunk]

James is fooked for hosting anymore techlinked then XD

[Doobeedoo]

Can we ban makeup next?

[IPD]

All of social media is an eminence front.  Things like this were bound to happen.

[PocketNerd]

Good, now do the same for deepfakes and voice altering software

[Thaldor]

I don't know is this really good. On the one hand it could help someone but on the other hand, I don't know how I would say it nicer since I have a bad habit with my pointy tongue, "if snow is yellow, it's common knowledge not to eat it".

 

Like making it mandatory to put a label on advertisement that it isn't real tells more that something has really badly failed in the schooling. It should be clear to everyone especially today when we basicly live within media that always take everything with a grain of salt and that there's a huge possibility that everything tries to affect you. But instead what this not-that-old-man has seen, we are going backwards in media literacy, generally people are today so F'ing dumb they lack the basic skill of even knowing what is paid and what is not even when it's slapped to their face like a big trout (seriously there's people who really think that YouTuber listing "top 10 best things ever" and for some miracle the top 1 is the latest and the most expensive from a company which also openly sponsored the video, that that "top" choice is really the YouTubers actual opinion and not 100% sponsored and paid opinion).

Seriously, if kids can't differentiate ad and movie from reality, they either have certain type of problems or the education has failed.

 

And as we get to slap stickers on ads and that ad photos have been edited, can we next time get politicians to wear something like racing driver overalls with sponsor patches, bodybuilders to wear a thongs that say "this body might be build with use of substances other than morning oatmeal", same goes to any top athletes really, racing should make it clear that the cars aren't stock, news channels and media should put on every article that it might not be completely accurate and some details are left out either because someone might get offended or some organization might not like them to come out, big labels on any food or beverage that uses artificial (be it natural or not) coloring especially that bright red strawberry ice cream (if you mix strawberry and milk, it ain't going to be firetruck red) and just make sure everyone knows that even the most known common "lie" is lie and it is highlighted and underlined.

 

[obvious extra joke]

"Just think about the children!"

[/obvious extra joke]

[Senzelian]

Would've been a better post if mentioned that Norway has already implemented this. Nothing really happened in Germany.

 

Either way, just goes to show how f*cking dumb humanity is, if you need a governemnt to tell you that the pictures on Instagram don't depict reality.

It's like we're trying to stop morons by putting signs up that say: "Please don't be a moron".

 

It's the same with the discussion of a speedlimit in Germany. Speedlimits don't fix bad driving and warning messages don't fix bad consumerism.

 

When you try to confront the people that are actively trying to ruin their live on social media they often tell you visually, not verbally: "Yes, I'm not one of them, but now let me get back to ruining my life on social media", with a dumb smile, a little bit of rolling eyes and a look at their smartphone, which makes it near impossible to actually fix the issue of bad consumerism.

 

And while I'm ranting I might aswell complain about a German bank that now allows you to write any name you want on their credit card, to show the gender that you identify with on a piece of plastic to everyone around you in hopes to gain that bit of attention that you didn't receive from your parents. So if you feel like a Leopard 2 A7 or a Rainbow Donut Honey Chocolate Deer with suicidal tendencies, then you can now get that engraved onto your own little piece of plastic self esteem.

 

“I really feel like civilisation's already over. It's not ending but it's already done. We're all addicted to the concept that humanity equals civilisation and that's not the case. We need a global conversation to be able to decipher how we can live from this point forward. We have to redefine our relationship with our environment.”
― Serj Tankian

[Motifator]

Good, adaptation, improvisation... but her weakness, is in the silicone...
 

4 hours ago, PocketNerd said:

Good, now do the same for deepfakes and voice altering software

Just don't take away my shower vocal patches I use on my POD rack unit to karaoke alone. Gets pretty hilarious, I must say. Kind of like this.

 

 

[thechinchinsong]

3 hours ago, Senzelian said:

And while I'm ranting I might aswell complain about a German bank that now allows you to write any name you want on their credit card, to show the gender that you identify with on a piece of plastic to everyone around you in hopes to gain that bit of attention that you didn't receive from your parents. So if you feel like a Leopard 2 A7 or a Rainbow Donut Honey Chocolate Deer with suicidal tendencies, then you can now get that engraved onto your own little piece of plastic self esteem.

Hey, I'd rather someone identify as a Leopard 2 A7 or Mi-24 than commit suicide. It's just giving them more freedoms to do as they wish. If someone gets a self-esteem boost from calling themselves an RTX-3090ti and engraving it on plastic, go ahead, has nothing to do with me.

[dizmo]

13 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Would've been a better post if mentioned that Norway has already implemented this. Nothing really happened in Germany.

 

Either way, just goes to show how f*cking dumb humanity is, if you need a governemnt to tell you that the pictures on Instagram don't depict reality.

It's like we're trying to stop morons by putting signs up that say: "Please don't be a moron".

 

It's the same with the discussion of a speedlimit in Germany. Speedlimits don't fix bad driving and warning messages don't fix bad consumerism.

 

When you try to confront the people that are actively trying to ruin their live on social media they often tell you visually, not verbally: "Yes, I'm not one of them, but now let me get back to ruining my life on social media", with a dumb smile, a little bit of rolling eyes and a look at their smartphone, which makes it near impossible to actually fix the issue of bad consumerism.

 

And while I'm ranting I might aswell complain about a German bank that now allows you to write any name you want on their credit card, to show the gender that you identify with on a piece of plastic to everyone around you in hopes to gain that bit of attention that you didn't receive from your parents. So if you feel like a Leopard 2 A7 or a Rainbow Donut Honey Chocolate Deer with suicidal tendencies, then you can now get that engraved onto your own little piece of plastic self esteem.

 

“I really feel like civilisation's already over. It's not ending but it's already done. We're all addicted to the concept that humanity equals civilisation and that's not the case. We need a global conversation to be able to decipher how we can live from this point forward. We have to redefine our relationship with our environment.”
― Serj Tankian

That. Doesn't make any sense. Why would you even need a gender at all on a credit card? If it's their name, it's a name. If you don't like it get it legally changed. Very easy to do. If they're putting anything, then I'd imagine it's more like Apple's card. Where there's not really a "name" at all, and it doesn't matter what you emboss on the card. 

[Senzelian]

1 hour ago, dizmo said:

That. Doesn't make any sense. Why would you even need a gender at all on a credit card? If it's their name, it's a name. If you don't like it get it legally changed. Very easy to do. If they're putting anything, then I'd imagine it's more like Apple's card. Where there's not really a "name" at all, and it doesn't matter what you emboss on the card. 

Found a little more information on it. It's called Mastercard True Name and the GLS Bank is the first German bank to adopt it.

 

Basically you can choose to write any name you want onto a credit card, so that if you hand over the card you'd be addressed via that name. I don't know what difference that would make anyway, but translated from Mastercards site there's a quote basically saying: I want the name I chose on my card, because it makes me feel good.

 

 

As you can see, this person wanted to be called Joao.

I have to agree with you that if this was so important to them, they'd get their name changed. Sure, can be a hassle and would probably take quite a while, but seemingly this is such a huge deal to them that it should be worth it, right?

 

I think I should get one of those Truename cards and make up and endless name and then tell them that they're discriminating against me because my name doesn't fit on the card. Then sue them and get a credit card the size of a stop sign.

 

[SADS]

The purpose behind the adjustments is important. I figure if its removing a day-zit from a model doing a hair product... probably not the end of the world, the reason for the use isn't directly related to the selling/miss-selling of the product.

Then you get people fully face-tuning themselves like 20years younger to scam people out of their money.

 

There's a wide range in how the filters are used tbh.

Sometimes its just to remove blemishes, other times its full face/body-tuning to mislead people.

The whole "unrealistic beauty standards" thing, probably falls between the two, so it's hard to set the bar.

[dizmo]

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

Found a little more information on it. It's called Mastercard True Name and the GLS Bank is the first German bank to adopt it.

 

Basically you can choose to write any name you want onto a credit card, so that if you hand over the card you'd be addressed via that name. I don't know what difference that would make anyway, but translated from Mastercards site there's a quote basically saying: I want the name I chose on my card, because it makes me feel good.

 

 

As you can see, this person wanted to be called Joao.

I have to agree with you that if this was so important to them, they'd get their name changed. Sure, can be a hassle and would probably take quite a while, but seemingly this is such a huge deal to them that it should be worth it, right?

 

I think I should get one of those Truename cards and make up and endless name and then tell them that they're discriminating against me because my name doesn't fit on the card. Then sue them and get a credit card the size of a stop sign.

Interesting. I don't think I've ever had someone use my name after handing them my credit card. That alone sounds like a pretty last generation thing.

I don't really see a problem having something else embossed on the card. It'd make it so you can't use it as secondary identification, but my replacement credit card doesn't have my name or even a place to put a signature, so I imagine that's on the way out anyway.

 

Hahah, all it would take is one post on Twitter and they'd probably discontinue the whole program and issue an apology. The vocal minority is really getting out of hand, in so many different aspects of society.

 

Name change isn't that bad here. I think it's maybe $300 ($137 for the actual name change, but you also have to get new ID, fingerprinting, criminal record checks, etc etc). My friends brother changed his name to Max Powers.