Background
THIS RULING REPLACES THAT PUBLISHED ON 10 JANUARY 2024. THE DECISION ON AD (A) ON POINT ONE HAS BEEN REVERSED, MAKING THAT COMPLAINT NOT UPHELD. MINOR WORDING CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE ASSESSMENT OF AD (A) ON POINT TWO, BUT THE DECISION TO UPHOLD ON THAT POINT REMAINS UNCHANGED.
THE NOT UPHELD DECISIONS ON ADS (B) AND (C) ARE UNCHANGED FROM THE PREVIOUS RULING.
Ad description
Three posters for Calvin Klein, seen in April 2023:
a. The first poster featured the singer FKA Twigs who wore a denim shirt that was drawn halfway around her body, leaving the side of her breast and bottom exposed. Text at the top of the poster stated “Calvins or nothing”.
b. The second poster, which appeared alongside ad (a), featured the model and media personality Kendall Jenner who wore a pair of jeans. She was topless, with her arms folded across her chest. At the top of the poster was the same text as ad (a).
c. The third poster featured Kendall Jenner who lay on her back, wearing underwear and holding a pair of jeans part way up her thighs. Superimposed text stated “Calvins or nothing”.
Issue
The ASA received two complaints.The complainants, who believed the images were overly sexual, challenged whether the ads were:
1. offensive and irresponsible, because they objectified women; and
2. inappropriate for display in an untargeted medium.
Response
1. & 2. Calvin Klein Inc said the ads were similar to ads they had been publishing in the UK for many years. They said that they were well known for being a pioneering and progressive brand who engaged in a range of equity and equality focused partnerships. In their view, the ads did not overly sexualise Kendall Jenner or FKA Twigs and were not irresponsible. Both models had collaborated with Calvin Klein to produce the images and had approved them before publication.
Calvin Klein said the images were not vulgar and were of two confident and empowered women who had chosen to identify with the Calvin Klein brand, and that the ads contained a progressive and enlightened message. They provided excerpts from interviews that Jenner and FKA Twigs had given to magazines about the ad campaign as evidence that they felt a sense of empowerment and confidence from having participated in the campaign. They said that the style of the imagery in the ads was not overtly risqué and did not encourage the public to view each model’s body as an object. They highlighted that well-known men had also featured in the campaign, which suggested that it was not focused on sexualising women.
Regarding the level of nudity in the ads, Calvin Klein said the ads were for clothing, including underwear, and so a degree of nudity should be expected. They explained the “Calvins or nothing” slogan was intended to mean there was no substitute for a Calvin Klein product and was a gender-neutral call to arms. Additionally, all conventionally sensitive body areas were fully covered in the ads, and the subjects were in natural and neutral positions. They said that while the outside of FKA Twigs’ breast was visible, the breast itself was obscured, and in Kendall Jenner’s case, in ad (b), her arms and hands covered her breasts.
BuildHollywood, who owned the relevant poster sites, said they had interpreted the images as beautiful and celebratory of women, and that neither FKA Twigs nor Kendall Jenner were depicted in an overly sexual manner. They added, that due to a regular change over cycle, the ads were no longer being displayed.
Assessment
1. Not upheld
The ads promoted the Calvin Klein brand and range of clothes. The ASA assessed the content of each ad individually, and in the context in which they appeared. We considered, from the manner in which the women were posed, their partial dress, facial expression, and nudity, that all of the ads contained images of women that were sexualised to a degree.
Ad (a) showed FKA Twigs wearing an unbuttoned denim shirt loosely worn over one shoulder and drawn halfway across her otherwise naked body, revealing the side of one breast and the side of her bottom. Although that drew viewers’ attention to the model’s body, we considered the image was not sexually explicit, and the ad presented a woman who appeared to be confident and in control.
In ad (b), Kendall Jenner was shown from the side, with her head and shoulders on the floor and her legs raised. She wore a pair of jeans, and her arms were crossed over her bare chest. While the image did contain a degree of nudity it was not sexually explicit, and the model appeared relaxed and confident.
In ad (c), Kendall Jenner was shown lying down wearing underwear holding a pair of jeans that were unbuttoned and part way up her thighs. While there was an indication that she was dressing or undressing, we considered the image was not sexually explicit, and the model appeared relaxed and confident.
We concluded the ads were unlikely to be seen as irresponsible or cause serious or widespread offence on the basis of sexual objectification.
On that point, we investigated the ads under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.3 (Responsible advertising) and 4.1 (Harm and offence), but did not find them in breach.
2. Upheld in relation to ad (a) only
The images appeared on posters, an untargeted medium, where they were likely to be seen by children and adults.
Ad (a) depicted FKA Twigs with an unbuttoned denim Calvin Klein shirt loosely worn over her otherwise naked body. We considered FKA Twig’s seductive gaze, pouting lips, and the positioning of the shirt revealing the side of one breast and the side of her bottom, when taken in combination, meant the image was overtly sexual and was, therefore, not suitable for display in an untargeted medium.
Ad (b) featured an image of Kendall Jenner wearing Calvin Klein jeans. Her arms and hands were crossed over her bare chest, covering most of her upper body. We considered that while Jenner had a seductive facial expression, the wearing of jeans and the positioning of her arms meant her nudity was not prominently featured and the image was no more than mildly sexual.
In ad (c), Kendall Jenner was shown lying down wearing Calvin Klein underwear holding a pair of jeans that were unbuttoned and part way up her thighs. We considered that her pose, in relation to the clothes featured, and facial expression were sexually suggestive. Sexually suggestive images warranted a placement restriction to limit the likelihood of children viewing them, such that they should not appear within 100 metres of schools. We understood that restriction had been applied to ad (c).
On that point, ad (a) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.3 (Responsible advertising). We also investigated ads (b) and (c) under that rule, but did not find them in breach.
Action
Ad (a) must not appear again as a poster in an untargeted medium. We told Calvin Klein Inc to ensure that future ads were targeted appropriately.
