Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
Marketing communications must contain nothing that is likely to condone or encourage violence or anti-social behaviour (Rule 4.4). While violence is the most common cause of complaints under this rule, the ASA has investigated a range of issues including vandalism, dangerous driving and drinking games.
Vandalism
In 2012 the ASA investigated a Greenpeace ad that promoted the painting of power station chimneys as a form of protest and requested donations to support the cause. The ASA considered that the ad encouraged and condoned defacing property, which would generally be viewed as anti-social, and would in some circumstances be illegal. It concluded that the ad was harmful and irresponsible and upheld the complaints (Greenpeace, 6 May 2012)
An ad in 2019 referred to political events (in which milkshake had been thrown at a politician) and a competitor’s subsequent decision to suspend the sale of milkshakes. In that context the ASA considered the ad, which included the text "Dear people of Scotland. We're selling milkshakes all weekend. Have fun. Love BK. #justsaying" would be understood to suggest that Burger King milkshakes could be used by people to “milkshake” Nigel Farage. Although they acknowledged the humorous intent, the ASA ruled that the ad was irresponsible because it condoned the previous anti-social behaviour and encouraged further instances. (BKUK Group Ltd, 2 October 2019)
Ads perceived to be encouraging vandalism are likely to breach the Code; however humorous and unrealistic approaches may be acceptable. In 2010 the ASA investigated an ad for football boots that showed the footballer Nicolas Anelka kicking a football in a room, surrounded by expensive-looking items that appeared to have been broken or knocked over. The complainant objected that the ad condoned anti-social behaviour, but the ASA, while acknowledging young readers were likely to view a famous footballer as a role model, considered the ad was light-hearted and that the scenario of a footballer destroying his own possessions was clearly removed from reality and did not uphold the complaint (Puma AG, 18 August 2010).
Young people
Advertisers should be aware that showing inappropriate behaviour in ads directed at or likely to appeal to younger people is particularly likely to be problematic. In 2010 the ASA ruled that an ad for a fashion brand featuring a woman exposing her breasts to a security camera might be attractive to younger consumers and encourage behaviour that was anti-social or irresponsible (Diesel (London) Ltd, 30 June 2010). Advertisers should also be aware of the potential for nudity to cause offence– see Offence: Nudity.
Alcohol
Code rule 18.4 states that drinking alcohol must not be portrayed as a challenge. Marketing communications must neither show, imply, encourage or refer to aggression or unruly, irresponsible or anti-social behaviour nor link alcohol with brave, tough or daring people or behaviour.
In 2021 the ASA investigated an ad that claimed “HANGOVERS ARE TEMPORARY. DRUNK STORIES LAST FOREVER” and featured eight cartoon drawings of people with drinks urinating, vomiting and not being able to stand. It ruled that the images showed and encouraged unruly, irresponsible and anti-social behaviour in association with the consumption of alcohol. (Person(s) unknown, 21 September 2021).
Similarly, the ASA upheld complaints about an ad for a drinking game that included the claims “UK’s most irresponsible drinking game”, “brutally exciting drinking game”, “Warning: This game is NOT for snowflakes”, “Brutal drinking game”, “Not for the SNOWFLAKES”, “Not for the faint of heart”. It ruled that because the ad portrayed drinking alcohol as a challenge and linked it with irresponsible and daring behaviour, it was irresponsible and breached the Code. (DrunkH Ltd, 14 December 2022).
Responsibility and offence
Sometimes ads encourage a different kind of anti-social behaviour and advertisers should take care to ensure that they do not encourage illegal behaviour. In 2022 the ASA upheld complaints about that an ad for a min camera implied that it could be used to watch people without their consent. It ruled that the ad was irresponsible and offensive. (Come_Crafted, 23 November 2022).
An ad for a mobile game app was banned on the grounds that it condoned and trivialised domestic violence. (AppQuantum Publishing Ltd, 24 November 2021).
See ‘Social responsibility’, ‘Violence: condoning or encouraging ’, Sexual and Domestic violence'.
More on