Is it just me or has there been an increase lately in starlets claiming they were 'misled' or ignorant of wearing fur in magazine and ad campaign shoots? Last week Kate Winslet came out saying that she thought the £11,500 silver fox fur that was draped over her naked body for a Vanity Fair spread was fake. While the magazine blamed it on a miscommunication. Now Gwyneth Paltrow has issued an apology for wearing what she also assumed was fake fur for Tod's A/W 2008-9 campaign (above).

On the coattails of the Pope upsetting anti-fur groups, Paltrow was lambasted by PETA and others for the Tod's ads back in August.

Mark Glover, director of Respect for Animals, said at the time: "Gwyneth Paltrow should be ashamed. I can only assume that Paltrow either is ignorant of the facts or lacks human decency and compassion."

Paltrow, a vegetarian and close friend of anti-fur advocate, Stella McCartney, has now responded to the accusations when she approached Dan Mathews, president of PETA, at the Fontainebleau Hotel opening party in Miami this week.

He told "[Paltrow said] that was awkward, and I'm glad you asked, because I do not wear fur at all. It was a daylong photo shoot on a boat near Capri, and there were all sorts of poses with all kinds of clothes - none with fur."

"During one set-up, a stylist came up from behind and draped a stole around my shoulder. I didn't pay much attention to it, and when I noticed it was fur, I assumed it was fake fur, but did not ask, so it's my fault. I know it's not a great excuse, but I hope you and your members understand."

I wonder how PETA feels about Liz Hurley at the moment then.