I'm always amazed at how many people buy celebrity magazines in order to gawp at overpaid morons whose very pockets they are lining by paying for the privilege of gawping at their overt displays of wealth.
However, I don't think this Lib Dem idea is particularly bad.
I hate falseness and fakery. When I see a picture of someone, I 'should' be able to assume that the picture is an accurate representation of them. If the picture has been altered, amended and enhanced then I think I should have to right to know if I'm being told lies.
Any publisher that chooses to display an 'altered-from-reality' image, be it a newspaper, magazine or website, thay should have to declare that fact.
By not admitting that photos are enhanced and corrected, you're suggesting that the personality concerned is as physically flawless as they appear. This might not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme of things and I suppose it isn't.
However, an alarming number of our teenagers, unable to reach the dizzying heights of (faked) perfection displayed in the media, take their own lives. Happily, I have lived through and survived my teenage years. But I do remember with painful recollection just how difficult I found it at the time dealing with rampant hormones and a spotty boat-race � when everyone I saw in the press was young and beautiful and spot-free.
I suppose I just don't like being lied to.