Most people have engaged in "retail therapy," i.e., "shopping your feelings," i.e. buying stuff when you feel down to boost your mood. Right? It can't be just us.
The Partners & Spade ads comprise the print magazine's first ad campaign in 12 years that comes complete with its own hashtag, #fillthevoid.
Does your "boyfriend have a boyfriend"? Is your intern your only Twitter follower? Are you only on day two of your five-day juice cleanse? "Fill the void," Lucky's new ads urge, presumably by picking yourself up a bauble or two from the app.
Of course, Lucky has before been dogged by criticism -- at least by our friends -- that it's more of a catalog than an editorial outlet; editor-in-chief Brandon Holley has called her mag an "enthusiast magazine" a la Cigar Aficionado. Yet, the message of this new campaign, i.e. that an emotional ache or even more dangerously, a literal hunger pain, can be massaged away with a new pair of shoes seems even more blatantly consumerist.
Is that so bad? In this writer's opinion, Lucky could have gone with "Treat Yourself" or "Splurge!" in order to avoid implying that buying a new pair of shoes is a fulfilling and cathartic form of self-healing. But, check out one of the ads below -- and see more at AdAge -- and tell us what you think.
Share your vote on Facebook so your friends can take this poll
Check out some much more controversial ads that actually got banned below!
Loading Slideshow
Ryanair
The ASA <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/15/banned-ryanair-ad_n_1279529.html?1329336365" target="_hplink">banned these Ryanair ads in February 2012</a>, deeming them too "sexually suggestive" to run in newspapers.
Drop Dead clothing line
Banned in November 2011 for<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/drop-dead-ads-banned-asa_n_1085903.html" target="_hplink"> showing an "underweight" model</a> and sending an "irresponsible" message.
Marc Jacobs Oh, Lola!
Banned in November 2011 for <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/dakota-fanning-perfume-ad-banned-marc-jacobs_n_1083535.html" target="_hplink">its potential to "sexualise a child."</a>
Banned in February 2012, for "misleadingly exaggerated the performance of the product," i.e. smoothing over Rachel Weisz's skin with technology, not makeup.
Marks & Spencer lingerie
Banned in November 2011 for <a href="http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/news-features/TMG8924873/Marks-and-Spencer-lingerie-advert-banned-for-being-too-sexy.html" target="_hplink">showing ''objectified women''</a> and images that are ''sexually suggestive'' and likely to be seen by children.
Lynx Deodorant
Banned in November 2011 for being <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/26/banned-deodorant-ads-uk-lucy-pinder-lynx_n_1113958.html?1322660080" target="_hplink">"sexually suggestive, indecent, provocative."</a>
Miu Miu Fall 2011
Banned in November 2011 for <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/hailee-steinfeld-miu-miu-ad-banned_n_1109948.html" target="_hplink">its setting, on a rail road track, being "irresponsible."</a>
Lancome
Banned in July 2011 for <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/27/julia-roberts-loreal-ad-ban_n_910587.html" target="_hplink">"excessive retouching."</a>
Maybelline's The Eraser
Banned in July 2011 for "excessive retouching."
Yves Saint Laurent's Belle D'Opium fragrance
Banned in February 2011 for suggesting <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/02/ysl-belle-dopium-ad-banne_n_817455.html" target="_hplink">"the injection of opiates into the body."</a>
American Apparel Ads
Some of American Apparel ads (including the one above) were banned by Britain's ASA for gratuitous nudity; a few more were deemed "exploitative" for sexualizing young women.
(American Apparel photo)
Lara Stone for Calvin Klein
In 2012, Lara Stone posed with a group of male models in this Calvin Klein ad. It was <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/21/calvin-klein-billboard-ba_n_771559.html" target="_blank">promptly banned by Australia's Advertising Standards Bureau</a> after they found it to be "suggestive of violence and rape."
Bulgari's Julianne Moore Ad
This ad was pulled in Italy in 2011 after the mayor of Venice found it inappropriate.
Rimmel's Mascara Ad
The British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/26/why-was-this-georgia-may-_n_788605.html" target="_blank">banned this ad after they declared it misleading</a> because Georgia May Jagger is wearing false eyelashes -- even though there's a small disclaimer at the bottom that says, "show with lash inserts."
Brian Atwood's Madison Avenue Ads
The <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/23/brian-atwood-ads-banned_n_1824162.html" target="_blank">video of this ad was banned from taxis and the print versions were banned</a> from the facade of Atwood's Madison Avenue store after being found to be too racy.
Natalie Portman for Dior
The Advertising Standards Authority<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/natalie-portman-dior-ad-banned-mascara_n_2004837.html" target="_blank"> banned this ad </a>because they felt the ad used excessive "post-production retouching" in order to exaggerate the real effects of the mascara being advertised.
Tom Ford's Gucci Campaign
In 2004, this Tom Ford Gucci ad campaign became controversial as women saw the girl's shaved pubic hair as degrading and wrong.
Rachel Weisz for L'Oreal Paris
This ad was banned after a complaint from Liberal Democrat Jo Swinson who claimed the ad was "misleadingly exaggerated" in that is makes Weisz look far younger than she actually is and presents a bad image for women.
American Apparel Sock Ad
Oh American Apparel, how you love to push the envelope. Here's another one that was banned because the ad is supposed to be promoting socks but it seems more to be exploiting the girl instead.
Taylor Swift for CoverGirl
This Taylor Swift mascara ad was <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/covergirl-mascara-ad-banned_n_1159957.html" target="_blank">banned by the National Advertising Division of the COuncil of Better Business Bureaus Claims (NAD)</a> after they found the product depiction to be dishonest with it's claims that the mascara will make lashes have "2X more volume" and be "20 percent lighter."
American Apparel Models
Again, American Apparel gets in hot water when they apparently use underage models (girls younger than 16) on their website. Britain's ASA <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/05/american-apparel-sexy-ads-asa-child-models_n_2243360.html#slide=1805970" target="_blank">accused the store of "sexualizing" underage models. </a>
Most people have engaged in "retail therapy," i.e., "shopping your feelings," i.e. buying stuff when you feel down to boost your mood. Right? It can't be just us.
Lucky magazine capitalizes on our ...
Most people have engaged in "retail therapy," i.e., "shopping your feelings," i.e. buying stuff when you feel down to boost your mood. Right? It can't be just us.
Lucky magazine capitalizes on our ...
I get Lucky free because I made a purchase through E.L.F. I wouldn't buy it otherwise. The captions above are actually a little funny to me, but I see one today that said, "My kids call the nanny mom." For whatever reason that caption is sad to me and I personally think it's an ad fail.
5Riders: I get Lucky free because I made a purchase through
Women who have real lives and active intelligent minds and a halthy psyche have no need to fill some imaginary "void" with more useless and excessive consumer goods. People who use their excess money to help others and supporrt charitable works generally have no void to fill, their lives are ful and interesting, their hearts are good and theri excess goes to help the world instead of buying more useless crap.
whalepeace: Women who have real lives and active intelligent minds and
This ad campaign is very clever! Look, it's a a little cheeky, and women will see it and want to know more! They will identify with it, and at the end of the day the whole point of advertising is to draw the customer in...Well done to Adage, as it shows they are great at what they do...they understand the online shopper!
I am a psychotherapist who specializes in the treatment of compulsive shopping and at the very least Lucky acknowledges a void is being filled on some level in the process of compulsive shopping. Unfortunately, shopping won't fill the emptiness beyond a moment which is why the process becomes compulsive. It doesn't sustain the satiation. Regardless, advertisements like these are not meant to be responsible, they are meant to tap into a part of each of us that craves the justification to do something we actually "know" we should not do. This type of ad is directed at our emotional mind and urges, rather than our logical mind.
Angela_Wurtzel: I am a psychotherapist who specializes in the treatment of
Both answers are more apt. "No big deal. A fashion ad telling us to buy things? Not exactly shocking, but still a direct indication of what's wrong with our culture."
IdleCrumble: Both answers are more apt. "No big deal. A fashion
As someone that has used binge shopping as a was to recover from disappointment, I kind of like it. And I think implying that the readership mindlessly absorbs material in the direst way possible is a huge underestimation of people in general. Stuart Hall would not be pleased.
kykys2: As someone that has used binge shopping as a was
I have long ago stopped receiving Lucky. There's nothing really to it. It's just a catalog telling you what they want you to buy. And I certainly don't need Lucky to tell me to do "retail therapy" and it's wildly irresponsible for them to encourage people to go shopping if they're depressed or lonely. People can and do get into major financial trouble because they drown their sorrows in shopping. For this rag to push people toward financial ruin is a symptom of our society and culture. Have no savings, max your credit cards out, you can't pay your rent, mortgage or utilities but you can look good living from hand to mouth.
syds180turn: I have long ago stopped receiving Lucky. There's nothing really
yes, but unless it were in a Gaming magazine or Tech or Cars its unlikely to have as much of an impact. Women in this country are socialized from a very young age to view shopping as a feminine pastime and anyone saying that you should shop instead of doing something that might actually "fill the void" like making new friends, getting involved in your community, going for a walk, or meditation is irresponsible...most of the learning done in this country is passive...it comes from the media in all of its forms and we need to be careful exactly what messages and behaviors we are promoting. Women in this country are also often socialized from a young age to seek outside sources to fill the void (approval from men, skin deep beauty, even having babies) rather than to look within themselves to find and change or accept whatever it is within them that is causing this discontent.
Amyqotd: yes, but unless it were in a Gaming magazine or
Loading comments… 
The Huffington Post | By Jessica Misener Posted: 08/08/2012 4:51 pm Updated: 08/08/2012 5:44 pm