#1418 TV3 brushes off Top Model nudity concerns, hastily photoshops offending pics

Photos: TV3

Compare and contrast – on the left side, the original photograph of New Zealand’s Next Top Model contestant Amelia Akiko Nakagawa Gough as seen on the TV3 website this morning, and on the right side, the newly censored image, as seen on the TV3 website this afternoon. 16 year old Michaela Steenkamp (whose breasts were clearly visible on TV3’s website this morning) has also been covered up with smoke. This hasty photoshop job comes after TV3 brushed aside concerns about the 16 year old going nude, saying, “Michaela, Danielle and Amelia all wore adhesive covers for the mud pool shoot. We make every effort to protect the girls’ modesty and none of the girls are forced to do anything that they aren’t comfortable doing.” Their response on Twitter was surprisingly blasé: “For all those concerned about the images from last weeks [sic] episode, the girls are not naked. They have bits on their bits”.

My question to TV3 is this: If there was no cause for concern over the images, why the sudden scramble to remove any trace of breast?

I LIKE YOU!

share on TumblrShare on FacebookPin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

Comments

  1. mina says

    Wasn’t the image of Michaela the pic you used for your live blog – in that photo she did not look lke she was wearing an ‘adhesive cover’ and I have just looked at the TV3 website and the current image of her shows the outline of both her breasts which would’nt show through the said ‘adhesive cover’ – TV3 are telling fibs.

  2. Simon Pound says

    I think to be fair to TV3 – it seems they were careful with the images in the show – but may have mistakenly put the unaltered images on the website. Upon having it drawn to their attention they fixed it. And good on them. Also – the fact they took the care in the broadcast episode to make sure the pics shown during the elimination were photoshopped shows they were protecting the interests of the kids. Credit to them.

  3. Peony says

    I agree with Simon… So they slipped up and put the unphotoshopped copies on their website… Oops. Fixed. The untouched ones actually show less than you see in many ads, video clips etc. I can’t see any nip, which is where I draw the line. Maybe my eyes are too old.

  4. JKL says

    i don’t see how something like this accidentally gets put on to the internet. Someone is pretty shit at their job.

  5. CM says

    They most likely cant be bothered dealing with the emails and hassles and would rather just fix it whether they believe its a problem or not.

  6. Richard says

    I saw the programme on the TV and the originbal images and nothing wrong with them in my eyes ! Lets put it this way at 16 Years of Age girls lined up to get their topless pictures in family newspapers in the UK! New Zealanders are prudes!!!

  7. Guest says

    There are many moral compromises in television and modelling but whether she’s 18 months under or over an arbitrary age does not make that much difference; the mental and physical differences between 16 and 18 year old females are minimal and more often than not, indiscernable, as was demonstrated by the fact that the photo ended up on TV3’s website.

    More than what was in the photo could be seen on most beaches today. In any traditional human society a typical 16 year old would spend all day topless. And breastfeeding.

    Was it right that this photoshoot happened? I think probably not. But small differences in age are almost trivial compared with the wider context of ethical compromises.

    An advertisement within prime-time television progammes literally contains a child asking about their “hungry manhood” [sic]. Lady Gaga prances about in her underwear with bottles of poison for the benefit of her tween girl fans. There are much, much more troubling things going on that our offence should be found with than the handling of Michaela’s chest (pun not intended).

  8. Will Underwood says

    I applaud TV3 for altering the image. And I applaud the debate about its appropriateness.

    The truth is that the sexual exploitation of women’s (and men’s) bodies breeds unhealthy, unhelpful, attitudes in all of us and they translate into unwanted attention and actions. It’s not about prudery. It’s about protection. Sexual crime is a reality; tragically an increasing reality. It is fueled by the immature actions of people who wish to sell copy.

    It’s like saying ‘it’s not the drink, it’s how we’re drinking’. Actually it’s the drink. And actually, asking young women to ‘turn it on for the camera’ is unhealthy exploitation of the young.

    Rome went too far and burnt. True there was a violin playing in the background. The question is to what song do we wish to dance ?

    Will Underwood

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>