(Frank Ockenfels/Blogs.AMCtv.com)

The advertising industry spent a whopping $125-billion last year alone to convince you that you couldn’t live without something. That is serious money, and while the ad industry can claim success, they can’t exactly say they came out of that success smelling like roses.

To combat the negative image many people have of advertising, industry leaders have banded together to launch the Institute for Advertising Ethics at the University of Missouri.

There’s a burgeoning need for this, says one of the institute’s founders:

“Because it is persuasion, advertising is viewed in a questionable way by a lot of people,” said Margaret Duffy, a former ad executive who now teaches at the University of Missouri School of Journalism and is helping to organize the ethics institute.

But even though the industry’s fundamental purpose is to convince shoppers to buy a product they may not actually need, such persuasion can be done in an “ethical and tasteful” way, she added.

The institute has appointed Wally Snyder as its leader, who will use his background as a former Federal Trade Commission lawyer and American Advertising Federation president to help people in the industry approach advertising in a more ethical way, and benefit ad viewers as well.

For more on the ethics of advertising, check out E.S. Issue 36, the Art of Persuasion.

In a story that could have been on The Devil Wears Prada cutting-room floor, a listener wrote in to Talk of the Nation host Neal Conan with this anecdote:

A friend’s daughter worked as intern for a famous fashion designer and had to run errands all over New York City. On one of the outings, someone on a subway burned a cigarette into the intern’s arm.

When she got back to the designer’s office, she got scolded for taking too long – no sympathy for the incident on the train, no reimbursement for the subway, no money for the internship. Needless to say, she quit.

Certainly most of us would. If a stipend is not possible, covering work expenses for interns at the very least should be mandatory.

Have any of you had a terrible unpaid internship? Get it off your chest (anonymously!) in the comments section.

Planet Green reports:

Researchers don’t know for sure that the lead in your handbag could leach out and expose you to toxic levels. But like the children’s jewelry and toys that were recalled in 2007 (see my Good Housekeeping feature for the full scoop) these handbags count as a pretty unnecessary source of exposure, and one that it makes sense to minimize when we’re exposed to so many unavoidable toxins in our air, water and food every day. And activists and public health officials alike worry about what happens when a toddler messes around with mom’s purse or jewelry, given the tendency of young children to put things in their mouth.

Which is why it’s great news that CEH announced today that it has succeeded in getting over 40 major retailers to agree to phase out lead-containing accessories. Macy’s, Sears/Kmart, Target, Kohl’s, JC Penney, Guess, Victoria’s Secret, Saks and other retailers have until December 1 to make sure their accessories meet new, stricter standards for lead content, after which they’ll face mandatory fines of up to $12,500.

This news just further confirms our established suspicious about petroleum-based pleather goods. Steer clear, people!

(via GbD)

However, it’s not a clear-cut example copyright infringement, since the Twilight costume designer has said that she bought that same BB Dakota hoodie at Nordstrom Rack to fill an urgent wardrobe need during the filming of the first movie. Meaning it was a commercially available product long before Twilight hit the big screen.

However, now BB Dakota includes a Twilight hang tag on every “Bella” hoodie featuring an unlicensed image of Kristen Stewart. Therein lies the problem.

Summit is asking that BB Dakota not only pony up all the profits from the jacket’s sales, but also surrender all remaining “Bella” hoodies for destruction. We understand both sides of this conflict, but really, creating all of this unnecessary waste seems far too extreme a way to protect profits.

What do you think?

While the legal practice is not yet available in the United States, Ms. Hatzis-Ritchie pays $250 to register each innovative idea with Australia’s government, which protects her in the event that a competing designer tries to steal her style. She most recently successfully sued Sydney label Reverse for copyright infringement on several designs.

She says:

”These type of businesses have started up basing their entire business model on buying top sellers from designer stores and then blatantly copying them,” says Hatzis-Ritchie, who settled out of court for an undisclosed sum.

“I don’t believe it was a coincidence that the designs copied were the top sellers. Reverse … were capitalising on our work.” …

”People would inform my staff that they had seen copies at places like Bondi markets or a shop at Bondi Junction. Or a buyer would call and say they were having trouble selling our designs because the store across the road was selling the cheaper knock-off,” she says.

For more on intellectual property in fashion, read up in our archives.

It’s becoming a very real problem for retailers, and it’s leading to advances in technology to crack down on offenders:

One of the most widely-known schemes entails something that retailers call “wardrobing,” which describes the act of purchasing clothes, wearing them and then returning them. Apparel (particularly special occasion clothes), electronics and tools are among the most commonly returned items after they’ve been used. …

Some returnaholics are even more bold. “One of our customers just identified a woman who was hitting them every single day,” says Derek Rodner, a loss control expert and vice president of Agilence Inc., which sells software to help retailers identify repeat offenders and problem returners. “This woman would simply walk into the store, make note of the store manager’s name from the sign at the customer service desk or hanging near the front of the store, go into the aisles and pick up several items and go right to the customer service desk and return them without a receipt. She would simply say that she called (using the name of the store manager) and he told her to bring the items back. This woman was hitting 27 of their 133 stores, two a day, and then she would repeat. She admitted to over $10,000 in return theft over the course of 90 days.”

If you have an honest return to make, make sure you keep the receipt and the tags on. And remember that return fraud carries a steep penalty if you are caught.

On Wednesday, a law was presented to the French Cabinet to ban Muslim women from wearing veils that cover the face for religious reasons. If passed, the ban will call for a fine of €150 (or $185 USD) and mandatory citizenship classes for each infraction.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy told the Cabinet he supports the law: “Citizenship should be experienced with an uncovered face … There can be no other solution but a ban in all public places.” Proponents of the law also say banning traditional garb will liberate women in the secular country from oppressive Muslim customs.

However, the women directly affected have a very different opinion on the matter:

With the law, “They are giving people the right to attack us,” said Kenza Drider, of Avignon in the south, who is married with four children. She was the only fully veiled woman to be interviewed by a parliamentary panel during a six-month inquiry.

“To tell a sister you can’t wear this veil is to say you can’t practice your religion,” said a woman identifying herself as Oum Al Khyr, of Montreuil, on the edge of eastern Paris. …

“They say they are going to free us,” said Drider. But “it’s the state who will force us into cloisters.”

For the past few years, Gen Art has done a fabulous job of showcasing up-and-coming green designers (and attracting big names like Maggie Gyllenhaal to its runway events). Sadly, last week, GenArt announced that it would be shuttering for good.

But not before cashing the checks of several young designers looking for their big break, according to WWD.

Chicago jewelry designer Veronica Martens is particularly miffed that Gen Art organizers accepting a $550 payment from her for booth space on April 28, then announced a week later that the event would not be happening as planned:

“They obviously knew when they cashed my check that they were closing the doors on the business, and it makes me sick to think that they stole money from me and my fellow indie designers who are already struggling to make ends meet,” said Martens.

Gen Art has done a lot of good in the past, so we hope the organizers make it up to these designers — and fast.

Apparel companies often don’t pay their youngest workers because demand to get a foot in the door is so high, and opportunities are already limited. With thousands of aspiring designers willing to work for free in exchange for experience, why would a company choose to pay them?

Lauren Sherman for Fashionista.com writes:

Our industry, and most creative industries, rely on unpaid interns to make things happened. If we didn’t have unpaid assistants working on set, or in the office, magazines wouldn’t get published, film wouldn’t get developed, and fashion shows wouldn’t run so smoothly.

I know that, during my time in college, I did four internships, one of which I was paid a commission on sales that I closed. (It was at a boutique/art gallery.) However, the other three internships, which were in editorial, were unpaid. One landed me my first job out of college. Britt’s senior year internship also resulted in a job right out of school.

Any former (or current!) interns care to weigh in?

At the Hermès spring sale, a fight broke out yesterday when a pregnant woman asked to cut the line, reports Racked N.Y.:

According to an eyewitness, a woman tried to cut, sparking a shouting match. Reports our tipster: “The cutter was pregnant and first claimed she left to get water for her friend. Then she admitted she went home to take a nap. That didn’t go over well with anyone who waited in line since 5am or with the security guard. She got in but after the people who complained went first.”

While we understand the allure of $225 scarves and $400 leather goods, who snipes at a pregnant woman over access to accessories?

Hermès on supersale may occur with the frequency of a blue moon, but let’s not forget our manners, people! Play nice with the other bargain shoppers s.v.p.