ASA Watch

An ad, in the Evening Standard, for the musical The Book of Mormon featured the quote SO F**KING GOOD IT MAKES ME ANGRY , which was attributed to Jon Stewart on the Daily Show. Issue

1. Two complainants challenged that the ad was offensive and unsuitable for publication in a widely available newspaper.

2. One complainant challenged whether the ad was unsuitable for children to see.

ASA Assessment

1. Not upheld

The ASA noted that F**KING was partly obscured by asterisks, but acknowledged that the intended meaning of the word was still clear. However, we considered, in the context of the ad, the word did not have a sexual meaning, but emphasised the extent to which Jon Stewart enjoyed the musical, while reflecting the adult content of the Book of Mormon and the language Jon Stewart used in his comedy. Therefore, we considered the word would be interpreted in a light-hearted context. We understood that the Evening Standard had a predominantly adult readership, and that the editorial sections reported on serious news events, while also regularly using explicit language. Therefore, we did not consider the ad would be offensive to those who were likely to see the ad. For those reasons, we concluded the ad was not likely to cause serious or widespread offence.

2. Not upheld

We noted that the Evening Standard had a predominantly adult readership and referred to explicit language in its editorial section. We considered its content included news events about serious topics that would not be of particular interest to children. Therefore, we considered that the newspaper in which the ad was published was unlikely to appeal to children and concluded that its placement was not irresponsible.

An ad on the side of buses and a poster for the film Poltergeist :

• (a) The bus ad featured an image of the head of a scruffy, smiling clown doll which stated THEY KNOW WHAT SCARES YOU. POLTERGEIST .

• (b) The poster ad featured the same clown doll and text in a darker format. Issue

Seventy two complainants, many of whom considered the ads were distressing for themselves, their children or had colrophobia (fear of clowns), challenged whether the ads were suitable for outdoor display in an untargeted medium.

ASA Assessment: Not upheld

The ASA acknowledged that some children and adults considered that the ad was distressing especially in an untargeted, outdoor medium and that consumers with colrophobia could find the ad distressing. We noted that the ad had a dark format and the image of the clown starred out from the poster and had a scruffy appearance. However, we considered the image was not menacing and noted the ad included no other images that were likely to contribute to such an impression. The ad also included the text THEY KNOW WHAT SCARES YOU. POLTERGEIST but we considered in the context of ads for a horror movie it was not overtly threatening or suggestive of danger, rather it was likely to be understood by consumers as being a typical reflection of a movie of that format.

Although we acknowledged that some distress had been caused, because we did not consider that the overall impression of the ads was such that they were likely to cause excessive fear or distress, particularly in the context of an ad for a horror film, we concluded that they were not irresponsibly targeted in outdoor media.

Two ads for Vivastreet online classified ads service:

a. A poster displayed on a bus stop pictured three women posing and looking at the camera and text which stated A little bit of Bella ... A little bit of Layla... A little bit of Nicola ... Get your own little bit at vivastreet.co.uk .

b. An ad on the side of a black cab featured the same image and text as ad (a).

The ASA received 24 complaints:

1. All the complainants objected that the ads, and in particular the phrase Get your own little bit , were offensive because they were sexist and objectified women.

2. Five complainants also objected that the ads were irresponsibly placed where children could see them.

ASA Assessment: complaints upheld

The ASA understood that the ads promoted Vivastreet's personals section, which included a subsection for escorts as well as dating. We acknowledged that some people would find the advertising of classified ads for escorts offensive because of the product being promoted. However, the fact the product would be offensive to some people was not grounds for finding a marketing communication in breach of the Code. We therefore considered the overall impression and context of the ads.

The image of the women in the ad was no more than mildly sexual in nature and we considered that most people who saw the ad were likely to recognise that the words used derived from the well-known song Mambo No.5. However, we considered that the words A little bit of Bella ... A little bit of Layla ... A little bit of Nicola ... Get your own little bit at vivastreet.co.uk , in combination with the image, objectified women and implied that they could be bought on the Vivastreet website, which was likely to cause serious or widespread offence. We considered that many older children were also likely to understand that implication of the ads and for that reason (and notwithstanding that the ads were not placed in close proximity to schools) it was socially irresponsible to place the ads in outdoor media because they were likely to be seen by children. Although we understood that Vivastreet were aiming the ads at a particular target market, they appeared in outdoor media and could therefore be seen by anyone. We concluded that, in that context, the ads were likely to cause serious or widespread offence and that they were unsuitable for public display.

The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told Vivastreet to take particular care when advertising the personals section of their website, including in outdoor media, to ensure they did not objectify women or imply they could be bought, to avoid causing serious or widespread offence.

Before investigating the issues raised below we told Protein World that, due to our concerns about a range of health and weight loss claims, the ad could not appear again in its current form.

While the ad was prohibited from appearing again solely on those grounds, we undertook a separate investigation to establish whether the ad was in breach of the advertising rules on harm, offence and social responsibility.

A poster for a slimming product, seen on the London Underground network, stated ARE YOU BEACH BODY READY? and featured an image of a toned and athletic woman wearing a bikini.

378 complainants, who raised a range of issues around offence and potential harm, challenged whether:

1. the ad implied that a body shape which differed from the idealised one presented was not good enough or in some way inferior and was, therefore, offensive; and
2. the combination of an image of a very slim, toned body and the headline ARE YOU BEACH BODY READY? was socially irresponsible in the context of an ad for a slimming product.

ASA Assessment: Complaints not upheld

1. Not upheld

The ASA understood that the Copy Advice team had seen the ad prior to it appearing and advised that it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence. We recognised that beach body was a relatively well understood term that for some people had connotations of a toned, athletic physique similar to the image of the model in the ad. We considered that it also had a broader meaning - that of feeling sufficiently comfortable and confident with one's physical appearance to wear swimwear in a public environment. We considered the claim ARE YOU BEACH BODY READY? prompted readers to think about whether they were in the shape they wanted to be for the summer and we did not consider that the accompanying image implied that a different body shape to that shown was not good enough or was inferior. We concluded that the headline and image were unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.

2. Not upheld

Although we understood the claim Are you beach body ready? invited readers to think about their figures, we did not consider the image of the model would shame women who had different body shapes into believing they needed to take a slimming supplement to feel confident wearing swimwear in public. For that reason, we concluded the ad was not irresponsible.