Lucky Magazine issues an apology (kind of) after fans lash out over the heavily airbrushed Britney Spears cover for the December issue.

I have to admit, the first thing I said when I saw Britney’s cover of Lucky at Target the other day was, “Oh wow…. they did a terrible job airbrushing her”. I don’t blame fans for being upset about it. She doesn’t even look like herself at first glance. Actually, she kind of reminds me of Connie Britton (Friday Night Lights, Nashville) in the pictures. Now, I wouldn’t say that she is entirely unrecognizable, as I knew that it was Brit on the cover when I looked at her, but there’s no doubt that pretty much everything about her has been altered. You can see the obvious changes for yourself:

Britney is naturally gorgeous, and while I don’t support airbrushing at all, it happens to pretty much every celebrity that graces a magazine’s cover whether we like it or not. With that said, it’s kind of insulting to the celebrity themselves when you alter a picture that much. She has quite the loyal fan base, and Lucky has really pissed them off this time. Some were tweeting that they even hated the “horrendous wig” she was wearing. Which, side note, if she is in fact wearing a wig that means that she agreed to wear it during the shoot and that it has nothing to do with Lucky’s editing. Just saying. The Britney on the right is the Britney we all know and love. The one of the left is like a bad clone. The face is there, but there’s something wrong about it. Lucky issued an apology on Twitter, but I think they could have done better:

What kind of apology is that? Oh, sorry you guys didn’t like it. Not so sorry about the fact that we did it. They’re not sorry at all, and it’s not going to change the way they do anything, or the way any magazine does anything, even though that’s what fans and other bloggers were hoping for. Lucky isn’t the only magazine to do some horrendous photoshopping either.

How does that look anything like what Selena Gomez actually looks like? Teen Vogue should be ashamed of themselves, though I bet they aren’t. There are lots of teenagers and girls out there that are protesting the use of photoshop on magazine covers, saying that it directly affects the way girls look at themselves, and I agree. This goes way beyond getting rid of a zit and is completely altering the way people look. It’s kind of creepy, actually. Look at what happened to Katy Perry on the cover of Rolling Stone.