BYU Law Review
Abstract
Unrealistic beauty standards in advertising have long raised concerns about their effects on body image and eating disorders, particularly for young women. While traditional means of advertising often use extremely thin models and digitally altered images, the shift in the advertising landscape towards an increased use of social media presents new challenges. Influencers have largely replaced models in advertising, and they often present unrealistic beauty standards, altered images, or dangerous eating and exercise habits to their young, impressionable audiences. In response to these concerns, several countries, including France, Norway, and Israel, have adopted regulations banning the use of ultrathin models or requiring disclosure when using digitally retouched images. Similar regulations have yet to be passed in the United States. This is likely due to constitutional barriers under the First Amendment, which protect commercial speech.
This Note explores how the United States could potentially regulate advertisements for these harmful body standards while remaining consistent with the First Amendment. It examines the test for commercial speech outlined in Central Hudson Gas and how the test could be applied to the use of ultrathin models or digitally altered images. This Note also explores the role of industry self-regulation and the growing role of social media influencers as advertisers. Lastly, the Note argues that, because of First Amendment constraints, the burden of regulation should ultimately fall on social media platforms. As private actors, these companies are best situated to govern the content posted on their sites and can restrict content that promotes unrealistic beauty ideals without raising First Amendment concerns.
Rights
2026 Brigham Young University Law Review
Recommended Citation
Annie Miner,
Regulating Beauty: Advertising Restrictions, the First Amendment, and the Rise of Social Media Models,
51 BYU L. Rev.
1217
(2026).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol51/iss4/9
