So here's the before and the after retouching.
My attitude about it was mostly, "Meh, whatevs." She's a commodity, she's a public figure, she probably gained a little weight and the producers went berserk or something and decided to skinny her up to catch that all-important 18-39 demographic. (Maybe she didn't gain weight, I dunno, I have not tracked her waistline, caloric intake, or the number of Ben and Jerry's containers in her garbage.) Anyhow, I know how magazines and publicity shots work, and when I find pictures like this, I giggle and feel better about all that airbrushed vulgarity that's out there. Yes, Par1s H1lt0n's butt hangers give me a warm fuzzy. I am that shallow.
Stick with me, I'm going somewhere.
So, yah, celebrities get photoshopped, cause otherwise mere mortals would be able to say, "Dude, M1ra S0rvin0 has the worst acne!" Pageant girls get photoshopped, since the headshots count for part of their score, which is evidently judged on the Rules Of Cute. Wedding photographs get photoshopped because a certain bride had 10 black stitches in her shoulder from a carry-on falling from the overhead compartment two days before the big I-Dos. (True story. I checked out of the hospital the morning of the flight to Vegas (pneumonia), was more than a little looped on their prescriptions, and got beat down by a rollerbag about the time we'd reached cruising altitude. My bridesmaids were not willing to humor me by drawing similar wounds on themselves with waterproof eyeliner, so photoshop it was. Have I ever mentioned that my big fabu wedding had some really, really sucky parts?)
Now take a look at these two photos. Same kid, and aside from the lighter/darker, same picture, ya? Mostly, but just a little bit different. See it?
(I took the photos off, because even though they were/are on public websites, I don't want them up here for all time, and by now most people who check my page regularly have seen them. The first photo showed an adorable little boy with strange looking front teeth, the second photo showed an adorable little boy who had lost his too front toofers. That was the big diff.)
The first photo is from a state photolisting profile, the second is from a TV station website that featured him on a "Waiting Children" segment last month. Unless this little boy went back to Build A B3ar in the same clothes, with the same stuffy, a few months apart, or unless he wears a bridge and forgot to pop it in till after the second pic was snapped, I think we can all agree that TEETH WERE ADDED to the first picture.
Whaa? Why? Why is front-toothlessness in a kiddo bad enough to digitally alter? Now, I can tell you that losing my two front teeth was a bit embarassing in my family, as all of a sudden, my mom would hand me the phone, then my relatives would ask me, "Do you remember the name of Big Bird's friend?" and I'd be forced to answer, "Thnuffleupaguth." This happened about four times a week, so perhaps the loosing of the teeth can be traumatic to a child, especially if Grandma's a real joker, or if your dad starts telling you, "Say it, don't spray it," at each meal. But for reals, will toothlessness at 6 years old really impede this little boy's appeal to possible adoptive parents? I just don't get it. I mean, dude, this child is adorable even if were to open up your paint program on your computer under program files:accessories, then proceeded to draw a moustache, goatee, and glasses on him AND his stuffed animal. (Add a "Born to Rock" tattoo while you're at it.) Why photoshop a child to put him on adoptuskids? It makes me all protective of him, like, "Go away, digital dentist, he's just right the way he is." And if fibbing about toothcount is a-ok, what else is? Hrmph. Don't Couric the kids, okay?
Get what I'm saying?