At the top of the In Touch article, the back-view image of Kim Kardashian trying to unsuccessfully squeeze into a wedding dress is clearly labeled as a *Photo recreation. But on the cover, there is no such disclaimer:
And while we’re at it, what’s up with the lower-face and chin contouring of the bride-to-be? It’s almost as if In Touch cut the head of Kim from one photo and pasted it on to the body of Kim from another. Even if that’s not the case, someone at the final-proof stage should have said, “I don’t…” to this element as well.
When other tabloid magazines have put composite shots on the cover, they have always – at least, as far as we can remember – labeled the composite as such. Adding insult to this In Touch injury is the fact that re-created Kim is sporting flesh-colored grandma panties and a bra to match.
It all adds up to, indeed, photo “recreation” rather than properly annotated photo re-creation. Not exactly an arc de triumph for newly appointed In Touch editorial director David Perel.