Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Two emails for The Post-Mortem Live, a live post-mortem event:
a. The first email, received on 19 January 2023, included the subject line “Donate your body to science”. Text stated, “At The Post Mortem Live you will embark on the internal dissection of Mr Orlov such that we can understand what happened to him in the final hours, minutes and sectors [sic] preceding clinical death. How does it work? Internal Dissection. Here we begin methodically dissecting the internal cavities and removing the organs for closer study, being minimally invasive we'll reflect [sic] the abdomen and remove the cranial cover where you will begin a brain, spine and cranial meninges dissection. Onwards into the thorax we'll dissect the larynx, trachea, lungs, diaphragm, pleura as well as the heart & major blood vessels. Observing and comparing to the medical history of the patient. From there we'll move to the abdominal cavity to observe the gastrointestinal tract including the stomach, liver, gall bladder, pancreas, intestine, colon and rectum. This is just one step in the process to help reveal the cause of death... can you stomach it?”
b. The second email included the subject line “Make us your second date”. Text stated, “Tuesday 14th February 2023 VALENTINES [sic] DAY”, below which was an image of serial murderer and sex offender, Jeffrey Dahmer. Text stated, “Dahmer the Monster had the nation fixated last year with the 10 part series on Netflix. Battling with his homosexuality he tortured and disremembered [sic] his victims. The story [sic] rather shocking. If you're dating tonight be sensible and make sure you're spending the night with a partner, [sic] you trust. Heres [sic] a link to the Independents [sic] article about Jeffery Dahmer...”.
The ad also featured an image of a brain being clasped by tweezers and a logo which contained the text, “The Human Tissue Authority”. Text below the logo stated, “The HTA was created to regulate human tissue and to ensure the controlled use of human tissue and maintain excellent working practices to ensure dignity, respect and prevention of disease. Read about who the HTA are, what they do, how the [sic] regulate and the kinds of provisions in place to safeguard us all from harm”.
Issue
The ASA received two complaints:
1. Both complainants, who understood synthetic and animal cadavers were dissected during the event, challenged whether ads (a) and (b) misleadingly implied that a human body would be used.
2. One complainant challenged whether ad (b) was likely to cause serious and widespread offence.
Response
1. ITAE Productions Ltd t/a The Post Mortem Live explained that the event involved a post-mortem demonstration and that a dead body was required for this to be carried out. The emails set out the process of a post-mortem and this was separated from detail about The Post-Mortem Live show. They had given readers information to explain that the body used in the show was not human.
2. The Post-Mortem Live said over 100,000 people received their correspondence. They used important dates in the calendar, in combination with what was topical and the interests of their audience base, to guide the nature of their advertising. Their show taught the audience about death and disease and invoked the themes of crime and criminals to do this. They said ad (b) outlined that people needed to remain safe when meeting new people on Valentine’s Day. There was no mention of specific dead people and ad (b) instead focused on the actions of Jeffrey Dahmer. They believed such matters were subjective and that somebody could have been offended by the notion of a post-mortem live event. But they did not consider ad (b) offensive and disagreed that the ad was likely to cause widespread offence.
They explained that the emails were targeted communications for a niche product at an opted-in audience, and that there was a low ratio between the number of people who received the email and the number of people who complained about it.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so and that they must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information.
Ad (a) had the subject line “Donate your body to science” and text in the body of the ad stated that someone named “Mr Orlov” would be dissected during the live show. The ad went into detail about the internal dissection of Mr Orlov and included the text “observing […] the medical history of the patient” and “This is just one step in the process to help reveal the cause of death”. The ASA considered that given the context concerning “Mr Orlov”, and the explanation of the dissection, consumers would understand from the ad that a human body would be used during The Post-Mortem Live.
Ad (b) contained an image of a brain clasped by tweezers and a logo with text overlayed that stated, “The Human Tissue Authority” (HTA). There was further information about the role of the HTA, which included “The HTA was created to regulate human tissue and to ensure the controlled use of human tissue”. We considered that consumers would interpret the image of the brain, in conjunction with information about the HTA, as meaning that a human body would be dissected at the Post-Mortem Live.
We acknowledged there was some degree of separation between the different elements in the ads. However, we considered that the ads did not draw a clear distinction between the nature of a post-mortem, which we understood required a human body, and what occurred at The Post-Mortem Live event. We considered that while The Post Mortem Live’s website stated synthetic and animal cadavers were dissected during the event, that was material to consumers’ understanding of the nature of the advertised show, and therefore should have been included in the ads themselves.
Because the ads created the overall impression that a human body would be dissected at The Post-Mortem Live when that was not the case, we concluded the ads were likely to mislead.
On that point, the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising).
2. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not contain anything that was likely to cause serious or widespread offence and that marketers must not use a shocking claim or image merely to attract attention.
Ad (b) contained the text “Tuesday 14th February 2023 … VALENTINES [sic] DAY”, with an image of Jeffrey Dahmer below. Jeffrey Dahmer was a notorious serial killer who murdered a number of men and boys between 1978 and 1991. Jeffrey Dahmer’s crimes were high-profile and remained widely known to the public. The email was sent on Valentine’s Day.
We acknowledged The Post-Mortem Live’s comment that the email was for a niche product and was sent to those who had opted-in to receive their communications. However, while recipients may have opted-in to receive marketing emails, they were unlikely to anticipate ad (b)’s content. The killer’s inclusion was unconnected to the event advertised, or the advertiser, and we considered it served only to create shock value. The ad stated, “If you're dating tonight be sensible and make sure you're spending the night with a partner, [sic] you trust” together with an image of Dahmer. We considered that flippant approach associated dating on Valentine’s Day with Jeffrey Dahmer and had the effect of trivialising his criminal acts and the murders he committed.
For those reasons we concluded the ad was likely to cause serious and widespread offence.
On that point, ad (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.3 (Social Responsibility), 4.1, and 4.2 (Harm and Offence).
Action
The ads must not appear again in the form complained of. We told ITAE Productions Ltd t/a The Post-Mortem Live to ensure their future marketing communications did not misleadingly imply that human bodies were used at their events if that was not the case. We also told them to avoid causing serious or widespread offence.
