It’s not another DUI that has Lindsay Lohan back in the presses; this time it’s her mugshot.
The American Beverage Association liberated the image for use in its latest ad campaign in Friday’s USA Today. The ad ran to promote the use of ignition interlock systems (the device that prevents your car from starting until you submit to and pass an onboard alcohol test) only in the vehicles of repeat drunk driving offenders, not those who are first time offenders.
“The reason that we used Lindsay Lohan is because she’s had multiple DUIs that have been high profile,” Sarah Longwell, managing director of the American Beverage Institute, stated to the Associated Press. “We need to create the distinction for the public what someone with multiple DUIs looked like versus a low blood-alcohol-level-first-time offender.”
The ad (see it here on PopCrunch) featured text stating “Ignition interlocks are a good idea for” placed above Lohan’s mugshot, then continues “But a bad idea for us” above smaller photos of people simply drinking.
How Fair Is This Ad?
Coming to the defense of Lindsay Lohan is not something we thought we'd do, especially given her multiple DUI background. But we’re a little iffy on the idea of the star's mugshot being used without consent for this mixed-message ad campaign. Not surprisingly, Lindsay’s legal representation are not impressed either.
“USA Today is idiotic to run such an irresponsible advertisement suggesting that drinking and driving is some kind of American 'tradition' we should protect," Blair Berk, a lawyer for Lohan, stated. "Not identifying that this ad was paid for by the liquor and restaurant industries is profoundly reckless.
Drunk white businessmen, drunk housewives out for girls night out and drunk wedding parties should be kept off the roads of America," Berk continued, focusing on the other images in the ad rather than his client’s mugshot. "Lindsay Lohan fully endorses ignition interlock devices, which have been well-proven to save lives."
The ABI has claimed that since the mugshot has been used publicly by high profile websites and magazines it was fair game for their use as well. USA Today representative Ed Cassidy, stated in defense of running the ad, "Advocacy advertising is a big part of what we do. Our pages function as forum for competing views."
Competing views is right, but Mr. Cassidy may have unwittingly raised issues beyond the use of ignition interlock systems and how drinking and driving should be monitored.
We’re wondering, is it fair for Lindsay Lohan’s picture to be used to endorse an issue she may or may not support without her approval? Should her image, or that of another high profile individual, be accessible to anyone who wants to slap a celebrity face on their cause?
We think not, but we also want to hear from you. Like Cassidy, we’re after the competing views.