Background
Summary of Council decision:
Seven issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A leaflet, for a bar in Leeds, featured 12 different images including: a monkey smoking a cigarette; a man wearing an "American flag" shirt and baseball cap; a woman in a bra taking a photograph of herself; a woman in a bear costume with her breasts exposed; a woman in an open baseball jacket that revealed her cleavage; the thighs and stomach of a naked woman whose crotch was obscured by a martini glass; a woman with her mouth open pouring a clear liquid into her mouth from a bottle; the head and torso of a naked woman with her back (which was tattooed) to the camera; and a woman wearing denim shorts and riding a skateboard. Text stated "FREE BOMB WITH EVERY DRINK little miss EVERY TUESDAY 10:30 - LATE Chilli WHITE No curfew".
Issue
A complainant challenged whether:
1. the image of the smoking monkey was offensive, because it showed animal cruelty; and
2. the images of women in the ad were offensive and unsuitable for a circular which could be seen by anyone, including children.
The ASA challenged whether:
3. the image of the woman pouring liquid into her mouth was irresponsible, because it showed alcohol being handled irresponsibly;
4. the images of woman in various states of undress were irresponsible, because they linked alcohol with sexual activity;
5. the leaflet was irresponsible, because the images collectively were likely to appeal particularly to people under 18 years, by reflecting and being associated with youth culture;
6. the statement "FREE BOMB WITH EVERY DRINK" was irresponsible, because it encouraged excessive drinking; and
7. the images, and particularly the image of the woman pouring liquid into her mouth, were irresponsible, because the models appeared to be under 25 years old.
Response
1–5. NoCurfew Events said they had not intended to cause offence and that they had removed the leaflet from circulation. They said the leaflet had been distributed with license for 14 consecutive weeks and that they had only received compliments on the design, which they thought was current in terms of the fashion and culture of students in Leeds. They said the images were meant to be eye catching and cool and that, although they may offend some members of the general public, students in Leeds to whom the leaflet was circulated would see similar images on a daily basis and would not be offended by them.
6. They said the drink offer was only intended to be competitive and that it was not the cheapest in the area. The free "Bomb" [a short drink consisting of a shot of Jägermeister mixed with an energy drink] was a weekly theme that allowed students to know what they were getting and they did not believe it encouraged excessive drinking, because it was not forced upon those who attended the event and was not only available until a certain time of night, which might encourage people to drink quickly before the offer ended.
7. They said they did not know how old the models were but that they were clearly over 21 years.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA understood that the leaflet had been delivered to the building where the complainant worked and we therefore considered that, although it promoted an event aimed at students, it had been distributed to members of the general public (not only students). We recognised that all of the images were intended to capture the attention of students but we considered that the image of the monkey smoking was likely to cause serious offence to some people, whether students or members of the public.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule
4.1
4.1
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 race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age. Compliance will be judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards.
Marketing communications may be distasteful without necessarily breaching this rule. Marketers are urged to consider public sensitivities before using potentially offensive material.
The fact that a product is offensive to some people is not grounds for finding a marketing communication in breach of the Code.
(Harm and offence).
2. Upheld
We considered that the image of the woman in a bra taking a photograph of herself was not explicit, the model was not topless and her pose was only mildly sexually suggestive. Although the leaflet could be seen by anyone, we considered that that image was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.
We considered that the image of the woman in the bear costume was explicit and gratuitous as her breasts were completely exposed and the rest of her was covered (by the costume), drawing particular attention to her breasts. Similarly, we considered that the placement of the martini glass in front of the naked woman's crotch and the way the image had been cropped (to include only the area from her thighs to her stomach) made that image explicit and sexually suggestive. We also considered that the image of the woman in an open baseball jacket that revealed her cleavage was sexually suggestive. Because of those images, we considered that the leaflet was likely to cause serious or widespread offence to an untargeted audience and was therefore unsuitable for distribution in a manner that allowed it to be seen by anyone, including children.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
1.3
1.3
Marketing communications must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.
(Responsible advertising) and
4.1
4.1
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 race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age. Compliance will be judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards.
Marketing communications may be distasteful without necessarily breaching this rule. Marketers are urged to consider public sensitivities before using potentially offensive material.
The fact that a product is offensive to some people is not grounds for finding a marketing communication in breach of the Code.
(Harm and offence).
3. Upheld
We considered that, although only the neck of the bottle was visible, the impression was that the clear liquid pouring out of the bottle was a type of alcoholic drink, most likely a spirit. We noted that the woman was pouring the liquid towards her mouth with her tongue sticking out in an apparent attempt to "catch" the drink, which could be seen flowing in a continuous stream past her outstretched tongue. We considered that her casual and careless style of drinking, in the context of an ad for a night club event which offered a "FREE BOMB WITH EVERY DRINK", implied that she had no regard for the volume of alcohol she was drinking. We concluded that the ad portrayed a style of drinking that was unwise and that it showed alcohol being handled irresponsibly.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 18.1 18.1 Marketing communications must be socially responsible and must contain nothing that is likely to lead people to adopt styles of drinking that are unwise. For example, they should not encourage excessive drinking. Care should be taken not to exploit the young, the immature or those who are mentally or socially vulnerable. 18.10 18.10 Marketing communications that include a promotion must not imply, condone or encourage excessive consumption of alcohol. and 18.11 18.11 Marketing communications must not feature alcohol being handled or served irresponsibly. (Alcohol).
4. Upheld
We considered that the images of the woman in a bra taking a photograph of herself; the woman in a bear costume with her breasts exposed; the woman in the baseball jacket that revealed her cleavage; the naked woman whose crotch was obscured by a martini glass; the woman pouring liquid into her mouth from a bottle; and the head and torso of the naked woman with her back to the camera alluded, to varying degrees, to seduction and sexual activity. We considered that those images had been linked to alcohol by virtue of the drinks promotion ("FREE BOMB WITH EVERY DRINK"), and we concluded that the leaflet breached the Code.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 18.5 18.5 Marketing communications must neither link alcohol with seduction, sexual activity or sexual success nor imply that alcohol can enhance attractiveness. (Alcohol).
5. Upheld
We considered that the majority of the models looked young, appearing to be of student age, and that the fashions shown were representative of those generally worn by younger people. We considered that the images, and particularly the image of the woman riding a skateboard, were likely to appeal to young people, which was the leaflet's intended audience.
We considered that the images cumulatively were youth orientated, and that the leaflet would have particular appeal to young people, including those under the age of 18 years. Because the ad promoted a club event night and included reference to the promotion on alcoholic drinks, we concluded that that approach was irresponsible and in breach of the Code.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 18.14 18.14 Marketing communications must not be likely to appeal particularly to people under 18, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture. They should not feature or portray real or fictitious characters who are likely to appeal particularly to people under 18 in a way that might encourage the young to drink. People shown drinking or playing a significant role (see rule 18.16 18.16 People shown drinking or playing a significant role must neither be nor seem to be under 25. People under 25 may be shown in marketing communications, for example, in the context of family celebrations, but must be obviously not drinking. should not be shown behaving in an adolescent or juvenile manner. (Alcohol).
6. Upheld
We noted that the leaflet stated "FREE BOMB WITH EVERY DRINK", and we understood that the offer was not restricted in terms of duration or in terms of the number of free "bombs" that each person attending the event would be entitled to (upon the purchase of another drink). We considered that the implication was that the free drinks were to be consumed in addition to the purchased drinks, as opposed to acting as an alternative to a second or subsequent purchased drink, and we noted that the event ran from "10.30 - LATE". We considered that the drinks promotion encouraged excessive consumption of alcohol, which was irresponsible and in breach of the Code.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 8.5 8.5 Promotions must not be socially undesirable to the audience addressed by encouraging excessive consumption or irresponsible use. (Sales promotions - protection of consumers, safety and suitability) and 18.1 18.1 Marketing communications must be socially responsible and must contain nothing that is likely to lead people to adopt styles of drinking that are unwise. For example, they should not encourage excessive drinking. Care should be taken not to exploit the young, the immature or those who are mentally or socially vulnerable. and 18.10 18.10 Marketing communications that include a promotion must not imply, condone or encourage excessive consumption of alcohol. (Alcohol).
7. Upheld
The Code required that marketing communications that referred to alcoholic drinks should not show people who were, or appeared to be, under 25 years of age in a significant role. The leaflet included reference to the promotion on alcoholic drinks at the event ("FREE BOMB WITH EVERY DRINK") and we considered that all of the people pictured in the leaflet featured prominently. We had not seen evidence that they were over 25 and the majority of those whose faces were visible seemed to be under 25, including the woman pouring a liquid that appeared to be alcohol into her mouth. On this point we therefore concluded that the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 18.16 18.16 People shown drinking or playing a significant role must neither be nor seem to be under 25. People under 25 may be shown in marketing communications, for example, in the context of family celebrations, but must be obviously not drinking. (Alcohol).
Action
The leaflet must not appear again in its current form. We welcomed NoCurfew's decision to withdraw the leaflet and we told them to take more care when preparing marketing communications that referred to alcoholic drinks in future.
CAP Code (Edition 12)
1.3 18.1 18.10 18.11 18.14 18.16 18.5 4.1 8.5
