What's taken so long? And when are we going to do this?

I just don't see how a law like this could be even remotely controversial: Warning: this unrealistic image has been PhotoShopped.

I mean, what part of truth in advertising can you argue with? If the fast-food chain's ad agency PhotoShops the quarter-pound burger to make it look two inches thick to sell more burgers, that's fraud. If the athletic gear company's ad firm PhotoShops Tom Brady's head onto a more-ripped-than-Mr.-Universe body to sell more shoes, that's fraud. And when "Redbook" PhotoShops oh, about forty pounds and twenty years off Faith Hill to move more magazines, it's fraud. The worst part is that magazines like "Redbook" try to pass themselves off as part of "the media." Which--when you think about it--raises the question, "If you can't get past the cover without being lied to, why would you trust anything beyond that? Sheesh.

Good grief, I remember when we Americans scoffed at the Soviets' egregious photo-doctoring for propaganda purposes. And now now we "capitalist swine" can't keep our hands off the mouse.

But, while I think that the French law is a highly overdue no-brainer, I'm sure that there will be pushback from those affected. You know: Meddling nanny state and blah-blah-blah. But here's the deal: You can't call it capitalism when the consumer can't make an informed decision. Period. Granted, you can make the case that Coca-Cola has been fraudulently named for the last 80 years. But, under the circumstances, I think we can live with that...