Zara Ads Banned for Featuring "Unhealthily Thin" Models – ASA Ruling, Brand Response & Industry Impact

Key Takeaways

• UK’s ASA banned two Zara ads for depicting “unhealthily thin” models, citing irresponsible imagery .
• One ad highlighted a model’s “protruding collarbones”; another used shadows/posing to create “gaunt” impressions .
• Zara removed the ads, citing models’ health certifications and only “minor lighting/coloring edits” .
• ASA’s 2025 rulings extend to Marks & Spencer and Next for similar “irresponsible” portrayals .
• Debate persists: Why target thinness but not overweight imagery? ASA’s criteria remain unclarified .

---

The Bones of the Matter

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) banned two Zara ads this week. They called the images “irresponsible.” One showed a woman in an oversized shirt. Her collarbone jutted out like a shelf. The shirt’s low cut made it a “focal feature” . Another model wore a short dress. Shadows pooled around her legs. Her slicked-back hair sharpened her cheeks. The ASA said she looked “slightly gaunt” .

Zara’s Defense

Zara took the images down. No fuss. They said both models had medical certificates. Proof of good health. The pictures weren’t doctored—just minor tweaks to lighting and color . They followed the 2007 Fashioning a Healthy Future guidelines. Recommendation three: models need health certifications from doctors who spot eating disorders .

Zara’s Statement:

“We note the ASA’s decision... We are committed to responsible content and follow stringent guidelines.”

ASA’s Sharp Eye

The watchdog dissected the images like a coroner. In the shirt ad, the model’s pose and baggy sleeves made her torso seem “very slim.” The dress ad? Lighting carved the model’s legs into “noticeably thin” lines. Elbows and upper arms looked “out of proportion” . Two other Zara ads were investigated. They survived the cut .

The Repeat Offenders Club

This isn’t Zara’s first dance. Marks & Spencer got banned in July. A model wore pointed shoes that “emphasized the slenderness of her legs” . Next’s skinny jeans ad fell in March. Camera angles spotlighted leg thinness. Next argued: the model was “healthy and toned.” The ASA called it “irresponsible” .

2025 ASA Bans for “Unhealthily Thin” Models

The Unasked Question

BBC readers wondered aloud: Why ban thin models but not overweight ones? The ASA hasn’t answered. Not yet. The rules police thinness but ignore the other scale end. One reader called it a double standard. The watchdog stays quiet .

The Industry’s Tightrope

Zara complies. They amend. They follow guidelines. But the ASA’s rulings hinge on perception. Not health certificates. Not doctor’s notes. Does a collarbone mean sickness? Do shadows equal frailty? The line blurs. Brands walk it anyway .

The Aftermath

Zara scrubbed the flagged images. No complaints came directly to them. Just the ASA’s nudge. They pulled them fast. The carousel of website and app ads rolls on. Minus two pictures .

The Bigger Picture

Body scrutiny tightens. Not just Zara. Not just the UK. France, Italy, Israel—they’ve all banned “too thin” models. Requires medical proof. Demands diversity. The ASA’s ruling? Another stitch in fashion’s frayed ethics .

---

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why did ASA ban Zara’s ads?
The ads showed models deemed “unhealthily thin.” One ad’s styling emphasized protruding collarbones; another’s lighting created “gaunt” shadows .

2. Did Zara edit the photos?
Only minor lighting and color adjustments. No body reshaping .

3. What about the models’ actual health?
Zara claims both models provided medical certifications confirming good health .

4. Has this happened to other brands?
Yes. Marks & Spencer and Next faced similar ASA bans in 2025 for emphasizing model thinness .

5. Why doesn’t ASA ban “unhealthily overweight” models?
The ASA hasn’t clarified its stance. BBC readers highlighted this double standard post-Next’s ban .