Lane Bryant Accuses Fox And ABC Of Refusing To Air Plus-Size Lingerie Ad (VIDEO)

Update 4/23: Lane Bryant released documents from ABC specifying when the commercial could be aired--during daytime dramas and after 9 p.m. in certain cases. However, the network doesn't give a reason for its decision.

Bill O'Reilly also weighed in on the matter, coming to the conclusion that with plus-size models, you get more cleavage.

WATCH:

Update 4/22: The blog post is back online and the commercial is back on YouTube.

WATCH:

Original story, 4/21:

Plus size clothing retailer Lane Bryant criticized Fox and ABC for refusing to air a sexy lingerie commercial, but later deleted an accusatory post on its Inside Curve blog saying the networks embrace a double standard of beauty.

AdWeek still has some of the text of Lane Bryant's post, which read:

"ABC and Fox have made the decision to define beauty for you by denying our new, groundbreaking Cacique commercial from airing freely on their networks."

The post also claims that ABC "restricted our airtime" and refused to air the spot during Dancing With the Stars, while Fox "demanded excessive re-edits and rebuffed it three times before relenting to air it during the final 10 minutes of American Idol, but only after we threatened to pull the ad buy."

The post continues: "Yes, these are the same networks that have scantily-clad housewives so desperate they seduce every man on the block -- and don't forget Bart Simpson, who has shown us the moon more often than NASA, all in what they call "family hour."

"While it's no secret that Victoria's Secret 'The Nakeds' ads are prancing around on major networks leaving little to the imagination, steaming up TV screens and baring nearly everything but their souls, our sultry siren who shows sophisticated sass is somehow deemed inappropriate ... Does this smack of a double standard? Yep. It does to us, too."

But as of today, the post and the ad (which was viewable on YouTube) have been taken down. Neither TV network has commented on the issue.

Comments

[trudyjh]

02:56 PM on 05/26/2010

So is the video of the LaneBryant ad available somewhere? Seems like youtube stuff vanishes before I hear about it lately.

[SymphonyinBlue]

03:34 AM on 04/27/2010

Far be it from me to defend Fox, but I suspect that the discrimination might stem not from shunning the women featured in the Lane Bryant ad because of their supposed 'size', but because their portrayal of a woman hits close to home.
Consider this - these women are closer to an accurate depiction of the average woman than a Victoria's Secret model. We have become conditioned to the 'impossible fantasy' that is objectified and displayed in the media today to the point of becoming blase and densensitised. However, if you put what looks like a 'real woman' in lingerie on TV, I'm pretty sure the conservatives are thinking: "that could be my wife or my sister or the mother of my child, they can't be seen on television like that".

[Lucy Martin]

02:15 PM on 05/05/2010

Thank you, this is a very thoughtful comment.

[kingstupka]

01:00 AM on 04/27/2010

The store that these women are modeling for does no enen carry the size 10 that most of them appear to be.

[kingstupka]

12:55 AM on 04/27/2010

We should have all women on tv in birkas so we canno see an inch of their shameful bodies or better yet, don't let them leave the house that way no one will have to see them.

[RRonin]

04:26 PM on 04/25/2010

98% of the decision makers in the media consider women with bodies like the Na'vi to be the physical idea. It's unfortunate, but hardly suprising that a commercial featuring a woman with a body like a living, breathing woman and not a CGI creation would be rejected.

[stormy1005]

12:58 PM on 04/25/2010

Oh goodness, here we go again. Fox and ABC were silly not to air the ad. Lane Bryant should not even be bothered about it. The commercials were well done and the women are gorgeous. I have no clue why this is even an isssue. Women are beautiful no matter what size and should all have equal exposure. As a natural size 0, ( 5'6'' and 115 lbs and proud of it) what disheartens me, are all the comments suggesting that if you do not have a certain amount of weight on your body or ''curves'', you are not a ''real woman''. Lets see, my birth certificate shows I am female, I have the reproductive organs of a female, what else do I need? What constitues ''real womanhood'', and how much do I need to gain to be a part of that club? Lets all be accepting of all body types and stop putting others down subconciously. I have never made fun of anyone who weighed more than me. I have, however, had strangers come up to me and tell me I needed to eat something because I was too skinny. I guess that is okay though. I am skinny and because society deems my body weight more acceptable it is okay to say hurtful things, right? How about this ladies and gentlemen, let us all be in awe of the myriad of shapes and sizes our bodies come in. We're all beautiful and deserve to be represented and respected.

[rainbowdaze]

10:38 AM on 04/25/2010

Classy & tasteful--model & ad. Fox & ABC must only hire size 0 women who have to wear turtlenecks but I bet the men have a few xtra lbs. hanging over their belts.--haha Both stations are acting disgraceful & obviously biased.- shame-shame. Get real!

[CalifroniaMark]

04:39 AM on 04/25/2010

Let me get this right,
ABC will not show a commercial selling bras because of cleavage but they will show Kim Kardashian licking up sauce off her practically naked breasts in a Carl's Jr. commercial to sell a hamburger? WTF?!!!

[rainbowdaze]

10:41 AM on 04/25/2010

So right Both stations are hypocrites. Ur post is right on!

[Freenation]

08:21 AM on 04/24/2010

hypocrites

[michelv]

01:12 AM on 04/24/2010

Plus size doesn't mean fat, not even close. For the photos, the woman on the right seems average, although it's kind of hard to tell. The one on the left is indeed plus sized, but she doesn't even have a belly. She is just generally thicker and more curvaceous. She is a knockout. These women do not represent "fat people." The woman in the video isn't fat either. She has a flat stomach, for god's sake!

Maybe Fox didn't want to air the ads because these women have definitely plus size boobs and curves, and perhaps the ads were deemed too sensual compared to other lingerie ads.

[greymom]

09:44 PM on 04/23/2010

You can't spend an hour on either network without a cialis or a extenz or a viagra ad.

[pgurlatl]

07:58 PM on 04/23/2010

She's not even really a plus size. She's a size 10 as most of the plus sized models are.

Plus size is size 14 and up.

[sdiaz]

04:26 PM on 04/23/2010

during christmas season, i remember victoria's secret commercials running back to back on almost every channel--while the sun was still shining. what hypocrites.

[Inanina]

08:24 PM on 04/22/2010

Whatever size she is, this model is gorgeous. Beauty comes in different sizes and colors. She definitely looks healthy. I am sure she exercises because she has no jiggle or cellulite.

[CalifroniaMark]

04:59 AM on 04/25/2010

Beauty does come in different sizes and colors but nobody wants to see Gabourey Sidibe in her bra and panties grabbing her keys on the way out the door to meet Dan for lunch. This goes to show that even a store that cater's to large women have standards for what they consider to be exceptable when it comes to weight.

[ReesieKitty]

02:26 PM on 04/22/2010

I get so tired of this topic always degenerating into a 'I hate fat girls, they're gross' vs. "Skinny women are unhealthy' arguement. In this case, the issue is NOT whether or not you find the women in this commercial attractive personally. It is why did these networks choose NOT to run the ad?

Whatever their reasoning, I think it's a dumb move on their part. Obviously there are a lot of women in the size/weight range to wear the lingerie shown in this commercial. And those women have money to spend and will most likely spend it at a retailer like Lane Bryant that caters to their size. So to me, refusing to show this ad means that these networks are in effect telling women of a certain size that they don't value them as viewers.

[sistahfriend]

09:17 PM on 04/23/2010

Thank you for those words.