Miranda Kerr's Contract Reportedly Not Renewed at VS: Miranda Kerr’s 3-year Victoria’s Secret Angel contract is up -- and reportedly it is not being renewed. Us Weekly reports that Kerr “is being let go as a Victoria’s Secret Angel,” partially due to her “difficult reputation” and for not being “a big seller for VS.” A source tells the magazine that “[VS] can still use her for catalogue, where she will get a day rate, but she doesn’t have to be an Angel to do that.” VS’s chief marketing officer Ed Razek told Us that he has already “invited Kerr to walk in the 2013 show,” but did not deny she has been let go from the brand’s stable of ‘Angels.’ [US Weekly]
Kate Upton Dates Diddy?: Kate Upton is reportedly dating rapper and mogul Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs. The Sports Illustrated model was spotted out late last month in Miami with the 43-year-old hip-hop entrepreneur, and met up with him again at a New York City restaurant last week. Upton was most recently linked to MLB pitcher Justin Verlander. [NYDN]
Is This For Real?: Bloomingdales has installed an X-ray-type contraption in select stores that will help you find a perfect-fitting pair of jeans. The "Me-Ality" scanner, which the company describes as a “digital sizing station,” has found a home in six Bloomingdales stores nationwide. A 10 to 15 second scan will point shoppers in the right direction towards styles and sizes that will fit them best. [Mashable]
American Apparel in Hot Water Again: American Apparel’s advertising campaigns continue to draw controversy. The United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority has upheld two recently-investigated complaints against the brand. The images in question feature women that “appeared vulnerable and overtly sexual, with the photographs objectifying women,” reports The Telegraph. The ASA has since issued a statement explaining that American Apparel “said they did their best to abide by the standards of the industry as well as creating authentic, honest and memorable images relevant to their customer base.” However they feel that the ads “heighten the impression that the women were vulnerable and in sexually provocative poses. For the reasons given, we considered the ads were likely to cause serious offence to visitors to American Apparel’s website.” [Telegraph]
