Faith Hill is a product, or more correctly a brand, and she is selling it here.

Faith Hill in both images is a beautiful woman, but neither image would cause me to buy this magazine; it is not targeted at me. It is targeted at people who want to look like, or be like, or by some other mechanism idealize Faith Hill. Yes, this means you.

We live in a world where everyone, to a certain degree, is disingenuous, I’m pretty sure lying started in the garden or Eden or before if you prefer. We all attempt to “put our best foot forward” in the world. Being completely honest, faults and all, is an extraordinally difficult thing to do – and in my own experience is fraught with pitfalls – sometimes it is better to keep the truth to yourself. Is the photoshopping out of a “few faults” after the photo was taken any different than having a professional makeup artist involved before?

I think rather than blasting the “Photoshop Attack” on the ever so nice Faith Hill (sic), you should find out what image she, or her publicity people, “approved” for Redbook. She may have “flown off the handle” when she saw the before cover and had them change it, rather than the “evil” editor “fixing” her image. The truth, like the real Faith Hill, is probably more complex than has been reported in the press.

I always figured you more as a “Jane” reader.
Personally, my preference for the 15 items or less line is the “Weekly World News”, which alas passes into oblivion this week.