Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
An internet banner ad seen on eBay, promoting an online retail store, featured three sets of images of women wearing thongs in a variety of poses and one image of a woman wearing a flesh-coloured bra.
Issue
The complainant, who considered that the images were overtly sexual, challenged whether the ad was:
1. offensive; and
2. inappropriate for display in an untargeted manner.
Response
Lightinthebox (UK) Ltd did not respond to the ASA's enquiries.
Ebay stated that following notification of the complaint by the ASA they had removed the ad from their website.
Assessment
1. & 2. Upheld
The ASA was concerned by Lightinthebox (UK) Ltd's lack of substantive response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code rule 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to provide a substantive response to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
The first image showed a partially transparent black thong from both the front and back. In the photograph taken from the front, the model's pubic hair was visible through the fabric, and in the photograph taken from behind her buttocks were entirely uncovered. The second image showed a white thong from both the front and the back and the third showed the lower torso and groin area of a woman lying on her back, with her knees bent and her legs partially apart, pulling at the sides of a black thong. The fourth image featured the upper torso of a woman wearing a flesh-coloured bra.
We noted that the ad had appeared on the website of a popular online auction company and understood that it had not been targeted towards any specific audience. Although ads for lingerie might reasonably feature women in limited amounts of clothing, we considered that the models' poses and the use in all but one instance of close-up photographs focusing on the buttocks or groin area rendered the content of the ad overtly sexual. We concluded that that content was likely to cause widespread offence in the context in which it appeared and was unsuitable for untargeted display.
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).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We referred the matter to CAP's Compliance team.
