Lucrezia Magazine

  • Photobucket


The Cozy Spot

« A Hillary Spoof... | Main | It's a Man Holding his Dick: Majestic Penis »

May 30, 2008

On Karma II or Karma by Dior

Sharon Stone singlehandedly made Karma into a bad word this week, and has now issued a (half arsed) apology via, Christian Dior - apologizing for her comments.

"Due to my inappropriate words and acts during the interview, I feel deeply sorry and sad about hurting Chinese people," the actress, 50, said in the statement. "I am willing to take part in the relief work of China's earthquake, and wholly devote myself to helping affected Chinese people."

She was pretty happy and quite up herself when she said what she said during an interview. Christian Dior has dropped her from its Chinese ad market, but I'm wondering why they don't drop her altogether. Gong_li It's not as though she has a rapport with women. She comes off haughty in every image (publicity or other), and there is no real joie de vivre in her eyes.

There are other actresses the same age as Sharon, to take over the Dior Capture Totale campaign, such as Kim Cattrall. But I don't get why they'd have Sharon Stone advertising Christian Dior in the Asian market. She is uber blonde and blue eyed. It's like advertising an adult version of Barbie to women who cannot identify with Barbie. Why can't they have Kim Cattrall for the western market, and Gong Li for the Hong Kong/Chinese/Asian market? I don't understand why a company would have Sharon Stone representing the Asian market in ad campaigns when there are so many Asian actresses and media personalities who are more appealing.

Can Dior's actions (dropping Stone) be considered karma? ;)


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference On Karma II or Karma by Dior:


Sharon is advertising their anti-aging skin creme. I don't think any campaign model is allowed, contractually, to offer their own opinion about political things. Apparently the cosmetics contracts are strict, having rules for everything including everyday grooming, then again, it's fair considering these models/celebrities probably work for less than ten days a year and get paid millions for it. Sometimes I wonder. If women didn't spend money, this world would be in the economic dark ages.

I agree that it might make more sense having a Chinese actress advertise perfume in china, but from Sharon Stone's point of view it seems a bit harsh that Dior should drop her, given the skewed logic that has an actress with a reputation for being slightly nuts advertising perfume in the first place. Why should anyone who has been paid to endorse something purely on the basis of their looks have any obligation to talk sense in public? The whole premise behind making women aspire to spend money is based on the premise that women are stupid.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Sponsor -

Premium Space


Visits n Things

  • Readers Online

  • eXTReMe Tracker

  • Photobucket

  • Personal Blogs - Blog Top Sites


Reviewed By...

© Anastasia Mavromatis 2005 - 2008