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.
Code rule 4.1 states that "marketing communications must not contain anything that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care must be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of age, disability, gender, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation..." (See Offence: General).
Marketers should take particular care to ensure that references to or depictions of disability in advertising will not cause offence.
Humour
Using humour in ads can help to avoid causing offence but the use of humour does not negate any offence which may be caused by an ad. If an ad appears to mock disability or people with a disability it will be considered offensive, even if this was not the advertiser’s intention.
The ASA ruled that a website for a blinds company that included text that stated “Made-to-Measure Quality Blinds…WITHOUT HAVING YOUR EYES OUT! […] Blind envy starts here…” alongside an image of a person with paint splatters and stars over their eyes was likely to offend. The claims and images would be understood as a reference to blindness and had the effect of making light of the disability. (247 Home Furnishings Ltd, 4 September 2024).
In 2014 the ASA upheld complaints about an ad that appeared around the time of the criminal trial of the Olympic and Paralympic athlete, Oscar Pistorius, which stated “money back if he walks”. Whilst the ASA acknowledged that readers would understand that to be a reference to the outcome of a criminal trial, it also considered that the text was a clear reference to Oscar Pistorius’s disability and was likely to cause serious or widespread offence because it made light of disability (Paddy Power, 19 March 2014
In 2021 the ASA investigated complaints that highlighting the unobtrusiveness of advertised hearing aids was offensive because it reinforced stigma around hearing aids. The complaints were not upheld because the ad did not compare invisible hearing aids favourably against visible hearing aids, or suggest that wearing an invisible hearing aid was preferable. The ASA also considered that the ad did not suggest or imply that hearing difficulties were something to be ashamed of. (Specsavers Hearcare Ltd, 16 February 2022)
Mental Health
Marketers should ensure that any reference to mental health in advertising is not socially irresponsible, distressing or offensive. In some contexts, words such as “mad” or “bonkers” may be used in a way which makes no direct reference to mental health and as such will not cause offence. However, references to mental health must be treated with care.
In 2019 the ASA investigated a complaint about a social media post for a life insurance company, which featured an image of a man leaning the front of his head against a wall with his arms by his side with text which stated “… Life insurance to die for”. Although the ad did not make a direct reference to mental health or suicide, the ASA considered that the image created the impression that the man felt isolated and was in despair. In the context of an ad for life insurance, they considered those who saw the ad were likely to associate the man’s posture with suicidal feelings. The ASA upheld the complaint, considering that by trivialising the issue of suicide and alluding to it to promote life insurance, the ad was likely to cause serious offence to some people. (Dead Happy Ltd, 11 December 2019).
In 2015, the ASA investigated an online ad for a Halloween costume called “Adult Skitzo Costume”, after receiving a complaint that it reinforced negative attitudes about schizophrenia and other mental health conditions. On the basis of the ad’s reference to a specific mental health condition and the use of the term “Skitzo”, in conjunction with the image of the costume, the ASA considered that the ad was likely to reinforce negative stereotypes about mental health issues, and the complaint was upheld (Abscissa.Com Ltd t/a Jokers Masquerade 28 January 2015). On the other hand, a “Psycho Clown” was judged acceptable on the basis that ‘psycho’ was a word that was also associated with villainous horror movie characters and, in the context of the ad, was unlikely to be taken as a reference to a person genuinely suffering from mental illness (Abscissa.Com Ltd t/a Jokers Masquerade 16 September 2015).
In 2016, the ASA received a complaint about a banner ad for an online betting company, which stated “SAVE YOURSELF” alongside a silhouette of a man hanging from a rope by his neck. The ASA upheld the complaint, and considered that the ad was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence, in particular to those affected by suicide, mental health conditions or gambling problems (FanBet, 02 March 2016).
See also Mental Health: Depicting mental health conditions, Mental Health: Addiction, Mental Health: Treatment claims, Mental Health: Suicide, Mental Health: Triggering or traumatic imagery,
Charities
Some material which may be considered offensive when used in commercial marketing may be considered unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence when used in charity marketing, where the content has an important charitable message.
The ASA investigated complaints about an ad for the mental health charity Campaign Against Living Miserably, that challenged whether the ad was irresponsible and distressing. The ad featured personal video clips of men and women laughing, smiling, and interacting with their families. On-screen text then stated, “These are the last videos of people who took their own lives” and “Find out how you could help save a life” and “#UnitedAgainstSuicide”. While the ASA acknowledged the ad was likely to be distressing to some viewers, the overall message of the ad to look beyond the surface to save lives from suicide and seek support to facilitate that, meant that any distress caused was justified by the ad’s message (Campaign Against Living Miserably, 05 October 2022).
The ASA investigated complaints that an ad by a commercial company that referred to body dysmorphia, depression, self-harm, and anxiety and included scenes from inside an eating disorder treatment unit were irresponsible and distressing, particularly to those affected by insecurities about their body image or an eating disorder. The complaints were not upheld, with the ASA noting that all the ads began with a content warning. They ruled that the subject matter might be difficult to watch and the inclusion of the information about charities and the content warnings would not necessarily remove the potential for the ads to cause distress or to encourage harmful behaviours. However, they considered the context of the overall message of the ads, as raising awareness and promoting support, was likely to be understood. The ASA also noted that the actions taken by the advertiser reduced the risk of children seeing the ads. (Unilever UK Ltd - ASA | CAP 8 November 2023)
In 2024 the ASA ruled that any distress caused by an charity ad highlighting a mental health crisis in NHS staff was justified and that the ad, which featured scenes of NHS workers in various states of distress, including a paramedic washing blood from their gloves and then the aftermath of an NHS worker’s attempted suicide was not irresponsible. (FL19 CIC 17 July 2024)