ASA Adjudication on Entertainment Film Distributors Ltd
Entertainment Film Distributors Ltd
Eagle House
108–110 Jermyn Street
London
SW1Y 6HB
Date:
1 August 2012
Media:
Internet (video), Television
Sector:
Leisure
Number of complaints:
2
Complaint Ref:
A12-195264
Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Not upheld.
Ad
An ad seen on TV and streamed simultaneously online for the film Piranha 3DD, shown during a football match before 9pm, featured scenes that included women in bikinis who appeared to be at a water park. A voice-over said "Let's all get wild" and a subsequent voice-over was accompanied by on-screen text stating "They're back with double the terror and double the D's". One shot showed a woman from the neck down running in a bikini and she had large enhanced breasts. The voice-over at the end stated "Piranha 3DD".
Issue
Two complainants challenged whether:
1. the ad was offensive, because it used gratuitous sexualised images of the women; and
2. the TV ad was inappropriately scheduled before 9pm during a football match when children could have been viewing.
BCAP Code
Response
1. & 2. Entertainment Film Distributors Ltd said that the timing restriction was appropriate for its content and did not warrant a later restriction. They also said that the ad was light-hearted rather than sexually explicit or offensive and the images were no different to those seen in magazines, on TV or in music videos.
Clearcast said that after consideration, the ad was given a post 7.30pm restriction which included restrictions immediately before, during and after children's programmes. They did not agree that the ad could have caused widespread offence or harm to people under 18 years of age. They said the images were a parody of old fashioned humour, such as Benny Hill and the Carry On films and did not believe they were gratuitous or without justification.
Assessment
1. Not upheld
The ASA noted that several scenes showed quick-cuts of people in a water park, some of which showed women in sensual poses but with no sexual interaction. In one scene the camera lingered on the images of the torso of a woman with accentuated breasts which was repeated in a slightly closer view. However, it was clear that the overall impression created was intended to be humorous and tongue-in-cheek. Because of overall sense of humour and its tongue-in-cheek nature, we concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause widespread harm or offence.
On this point we investigated the ad under BCAP Code rules 4.1 and 4.2 (Harm and offence) but did not find it in breach.
2. Not upheld
We considered that the overall effect of the scenes was mild and did not consider that the ad was inappropriate when broadcast after 7.30pm even during a football match which we understood may have had higher numbers of children watching than normal.
Although the ad featured some images which might be inappropriate for a very young audience, we concluded that the ad was not overly sexual and that the scheduling restriction applied was sufficient.
On this point we investigated the ad under BCAP Code rules 32.3 and 32.5.3 (Scheduling of television and radio advertisements, under-16s) but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
