Ralph Lauren kicks off because they think that someone has photochpped <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/09 ... s_apology/" target="_blank">their cover picture</a>, only to find out that is what the cover picture actually looks like and it was done and signed off as done by their own Ralph Lauren department of quirky picture editors...
The site they were wrestling with you will read in the article is called <a href="http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Photoshop Disasters</a>. Some of the photos are so ridiculous it makes you wonder what these people were on... not the photo editors, that's plain to see, but the people that signed them off as ready for publishing.
One I struggled to spot a problem with was this one, anyone see it?

