Outrage as School Offers Airbrushing Services for Eight-Year-Old Children, Including Teeth Whitening and Evening of Skin Tones

Outrage as School Offers Airbrushing Services for Eight-Year-Old Children, Including Teeth Whitening and Evening of Skin Tones

A mother has voiced her concerns on Twitter after her eight-year-old child’s annual school photograph included options of “basic and premium retouching” packages. The services offered were blemish removal, evening skin tones, and teeth whitening.

Sam Walker, a radio journalist who previously worked at the BBC in the UK before relocating to Phoenix, Arizona, voiced her concerns online after spotting the options on a school form. Following options for parents to select the sizing of their images and whether they wanted a digital copy, they were presented with retouching packages. Anyone choosing the basic set will see blemishes removed, while the premium bundle goes as far as evening out skin tones and whitening of the child’s teeth.

Posting an image of the form online, Walker’s tweet sparked outrage on the social media site. Many questioned what kind of message it sends to young children, with one claiming she was “worr[ied] what Instagram is doing to kids.” Supernanny Jo Frost responded to the Tweet, writing: “That’s absolutely disgusting!! Yes WTF”

Walker did not disclose the school in question, nor how much the packages cost. She says she made a formal complaint to the school.

Metro US has contacted Sam for further comment. So far, no word back.

Jack Alexander's picture

A 28-year-old self-taught photographer, Jack Alexander specialises in intimate portraits with musicians, actors, and models.

Log in or register to post comments
97 Comments

No shortage of outrage out there....what message does it send to the kids? People want to look their best, especially in photographs?

Surely if you don't want those services then you simply don't check those items in your order?

More stupid PC. Its an option, if you dont want it, dont take it. I commend the Photographer for offering it.

I'm tipping you don't have children that age. The appearance of children changes throughout each day, let alone over the days weeks and months it takes between the shoot and the delivery of school photos.

Ah I see, you've come here from the Twitter echo chamber which has convinced you that you're so obviously right that anyone who disagrees must be ignorant and unconsidered. There's nothing like a bit of reading combined with a lack of experience to give one such overconfidence in themselves!

I'll leave you to all that.

Yep, we live in a world where 8year old have to (yes have to) have the newest phone despite parents being broke financially because socially it's immoral parenting if they don't have it! They'll probably be bullied for that and need mental assistance by 18 for the stress imposed by parent who do not follow the lala land trendy what ever the hype is at the moment. It is absolutely absurd how many fail to understand the meaning of that lady's concern.

I commend the photographer for offering it. Have you seen kids these days? Some are just so ugly.

Thanks facist morality police.

Lots of outrage on that Twitter thread but the most well-reasoned arguments seem to indicate that these forms are standard for K-12 and have been for quite awhile, rather than specifically targeting younger children for airbrushing/retouching/teeth whitening/whatever. Also as per the original tweet....the service is *optional* so if you're so against having this service done for your kid then just don't use it. Pretty simple.

School photos.
Never ordered any but the group shot. The rest have been invariably shite cashcows for the firm behind the mug they hired to go to the school and press the button.

We need a program here, called "This week in stupid."

It's offered, which means it can be declined. If you don't like it, don't buy it... I fail to see what the problem is.

Ooh, gasp, such an outrage, I’m deeply offended.

Meanwhile, the world’s 850,000,000 hungry people are still hungry.

Europe throws away perfectly edible food every year that can feed the worlds hungry four times over. There is plenty to go around. Look at the massive populations of China and India. Breeding is a small part of the problem.

So much outrage over something that is optional.

I don't blame her, it's school pictures, let the kids look like kids. If parents want professional finish, they don't need to spend more money than needed on a 3 minute session from school. School pictures already seem to have some mask/filters applied automatically to smooth skin and sharpen parts of the faces. How unnatural do you want your kids to look? I don't specialize in portraiture, but parents who want good results should really hire a pro.

Considering this is up to the parent of the child to choose the level of retouching they would want, I would say it is none of your business how someone elses child wants to look.

One reason I wouldn't ask for retouching on school photos is because they're unlikely to do a good job! However, if the next parent wants to take the risk then I think they should not be prevented.

As I rule, I think it's best to let parents be parents and kids be kids and mind our own business when it comes to everyone outside our own close circles.

I don't quite get why you guys have decided that I think this option should be illegal, removed or what ever goes through your mind. As parents we have purchased school pictures and as my kids got older, they, themselves have asked me why and what happen that they look weird on these photos. In fact my wife purchase and they don't even want to look at them any more.
Yes it's optional, yes I have certainly noticed that option in recent year. But I guaranty you that this extra cost is just a 15 second process by a human to check if the image needs more blur adjustment or may be send the order to another department for possibly some photo shop retouching. In other words, a very large number of parents who take that option will get zero improvement. I just looked at my daughter's pictures from this year and I base my opinion on what I see. They are just playing on fear, the fear that you may be missing on something they create, just like paying for extra insurances on product and find out that that ring in your dryer is not even covered. I don't know if you have ever seen these ads for $12/hour photographers that are a permanent feature in local jobs search. That's what we are talking about, it's all canned from start to end, don't expect real personal service but a lot of automation.
Bottom line if anyone wants their kids pictures to look like a canned product, no problem, but I think that lady likes the charm of imperfection and want to remember her kids the way they are. I don't blame her for not understanding why people want artificial memory of their kids.

Like everyone here, you're entitled to your view. But your decision to label the thoughts of those you disagree with as "ignorance" shows an arrogance and disrespect that is in very poor taste.

You continue to show arrogance and disrespect as you assume, without evidence, that people haven't taken the time to consider their views. Shame.

So are we to assume that you're no Picaso yourself then?

Boo hoo Edison... the best thing you can do for a kid is teach them not to be a wimpy, coddled little victim their whole lives.

just that they say that they think this option is okay is enough to call them ignorant... it doesn't need any more evidence or analyzes...
It is just plain ignorance, nothing else...

I was quite surprised to see such an well thought out and reasoned comment here. Something rare to see around here lately.

Lee, we are talking about massive commercial photo processing. Millions of kids who have their pictures taken between September and October. If it was about local photographers it would be another issue. We are talking about a lot of automation. No local photographer can match their process and make real $. Before online proofs, they used to send ALL families actual print and anything parents didn't want to pay for was returned and destroyed. That's how massive these places are. They have their lab and cost of paper was negligible and now they print only what is prepaid for. It's the same with digital, you can pay extra but if your kids don't have skin issue it's like handing $20 and get nothing. This story is really not about the process but I can guaranty you the volume of retouch they get paid for is done in seconds and few probably require an actual tech person to open a file. Plus the technology is probably better every year. You get that weird look with teeth coming out of the picture, super sharp eyes and soft looking cheeks. Again, the lady is talking about the social aspect, not the process, so being an option is absolutely not relevant.

What??? Are you familiar with school photography at all? Edit. Sorry, I realize you are not in the US. Please tell us about the process used in the UK. Here, it's massive business and no room for small players.

They do retake in the US. There is such a day build in the agreement with the schools.

Lee, someone is up their own butt, and it isn't you.

Actually it's your youthful naivete, ignorance and self righteous attitude that is so offensive.
Just because your a child doesn't mean we're going to give you a pass here.

And you think anybody here cares what you think?
You're a troll.
You're doing a good job of convincing people not to interact with you.
Good job.
Bye bye

So you are saying, that people in general are so stupid that some higher authority should tell them what to say, do, offer, accept,...? I´m sorry but this was reality once in my country. It was called communism. Not to say that it should be just because somebody is "offended" or "outraged". Be adult, deal with things and learn your children to do it as well. Jeez...

More comments