Contemporary advertising regulation A2 Media / G325

The need for regulation Banned adverts The work of the ASA Creating adverts for different audiences

Who are the ASA? “The ASA is here to make sure all advertising, wherever it appears, meets the high standards laid down in the advertising codes. We make sure standards are kept high by applying the advertising standards codes. We can stop misleading, harmful or offensive advertising. “ (from The main principles of the advertising standards codes are that ads should not mislead, cause harm, or offend.

Why regulate? In radio ads, advertisers are not allowed to include car noises such as horns and engine noises as they may distract drivers. In television advertisements, adverts have to conform to decency standards which include a watershed at 9pm which ensures that younger viewers are not exposed to disturbing programmes or advertising content. In alcohol ads, the actors and actresses have to look as though they are over the age of 21. There have been lots of arguments about whether alcohol and tobacco / smoking should be banned, especially where products appear to target children such as alcopops. Smoking ads have been banned by the Government everywhere in the UK. This caused much controversy in motor racing because the racing teams used to get the majority of their funding from tobacco manufacturers. Some advertising campaigns have been banned due to their offensive nature. This was the case with some Benetton adverts.

What’s wrong with this ad?

The ASA response Issue A consumer, who pointed out that none of the models wore safety equipment, believed that the catalogue was irresponsible, because the pictures implied that it was safe and legal to ride motorcycles and quad bikes without wearing a helmet. Response Fat Face said they did not condone illegal activity, but did support the freedom of the individual to make choices where it was legal for them to do so, including in some jurisdictions the freedom to choose whether or not to wear a helmet on a motorcycle. They believed they were not irresponsible in treating adults as being capable of assessing their own levels of risk or the safety precautions that they should take, subject to obeying the local applicable road safety regulations. Fat Face said the images appeared in their Spring catalogue, which had now been superseded.

The ASA response Assessment Upheld The ASA understood that, for personal safety, UK law required motorcycle drivers and passengers to wear crash helmets. We understood there was no such legal requirement for quad bike riders but noted that the Health & Safety Executive advised them to wear suitable head protection. We noted a number of the pictures showed the motorbikes as stationary and, although the models were not wearing crash helmets, we considered that, because it was clear that the bikes were not moving, the images were unlikely to condone or encourage irresponsible behaviour. However, we also noted that two pictures featured a motorbike and a quad bike, apparently in motion, with neither the driver nor passenger wearing crash helmets contrary to recognised safety requirements and advice. We considered that these images were irresponsible and likely to be seen to be condoning unsafe practices. The catalogue breached CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Social responsibility) and 10.1 (Safety).