Banning ads has been all the rage this year.

South Africa banned AXE ads for being offensive to Christians, while Dakota Fanning‘s Marc Jacobs perfume ads were banned in the United Kingdom for being too “sexually provocative.” But the latest ad to be banned was done ironically because it was deemed too perfect.

Procter and Gamble, the owners of CoverGirl, voluntarily pulled their CoverGirl NatureLuxe Mouse Mascara ads featuring country singer Taylor Swift after the photos were deemed “dishonest” and “excessively photoshopped” by the US’s National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus (NAD) despite a disclaimer printed on the bottom of the ad that reads, “Lashes enhanced in post production.”

“NAD was particularly troubled by the photograph of the model—which serves clearly to demonstrate (i.e., let consumers see for themselves) the length and volume they can achieve when they apply the advertised mascara to their eyelashes,” they stated in their ruling. “This picture is accompanied by a disclosure that the model’s eyelashes had been enhanced post production.”

Although the ban itself does seem a little “excessive,” we can’t help but agree that an advertisement promoting a mascara to make your lashes fuller, shouldn’t use photoshop or special digital effects to make your lashes look, well, fuller. As NAD director Andrea Levine explained best to Business Insider, “You can’t use a photograph to demonstrate how a cosmetic will look after it is applied to a woman’s face and then – in the mice type – have a disclosure that says ‘okay, not really.’ ”

Truer words have never been spoken. But, what do you think,? Should a product called “NatureLuxe” have ads that are natural and not doctored or digitally-enhanced?

Bookmark to: