ASA Adjudications Snapshot - July 2010

This article provides a selection of the most interesting ASA adjudications from July and a summary of the key issues considered in the adjudications.

This month, the ASA gave particular consideration to the targeting and nature of adverts when assessing whether adverts could cause harm or offence. A number of the adjudications highlight the importance the ASA places on humour and imagery of adverts, and the style and nature of the depictions when assessing the risk of causing serious harm or widespread offence to consumers. Click here to view the snapshot in full. FOOD AND DRINK 1. Pepsico International, 14 July 2010 (Pepsi Max advert considered too fantastical to cause harm or offence) 2. Tesco Stores Limited, 21 July 2010 (considered the claim "Fresh bread. Baked from scratch in our in store bakery" misleading) HEALTH AND BEAUTY 3. L'Oreal (UK) Limited, 7 July 2010 (TV advert for skin cream found the claim "inspired by the science of genes" not to be misleading) 4. Simply Organic, 28 July 2010 (considered that claims "Simply Organic" and "Naturally Organic" were likely to mislead) 5. Healthy Bowels Company Limited, 21 July 2010 (product-specific evidence required to support health claims) OTHER 6. Virgin Media Ltd, 28 July 2010 (considered the claims" For a one-off set up fee of £49" and "No monthly fee" misleading) 7. Wonga.com Ltd, 14 July 2010 (TV advert for loan company trivialised the nature and implications of the product) 8. Paddy Power plc, 21 July 2010 (TV advert found not to be offensive when referring to or involving people with a disability) 9. ASDA Stores Ltd, 14 July 2010 (TV advert breached Code by presenting rights given to consumers in law as distinctive features of the adverts offer) 10. BMW (UK) Ltd, 28 July 2010 ("green claims" considered to be misleading) NON-COMMERCIAL 11. Telegraph Media Group t/a The Daily Telegraph, 21 July 2010 (definition of "free" considered)

To view the article in full, please see below:

Full Article

This article provides a selection of the most interesting ASA adjudications from July and a summary of the key issues considered in the adjudications.

This month, the ASA gave particular consideration to the targeting and nature of adverts when assessing whether adverts could cause harm or offence. A number of the adjudications highlight the importance the ASA places on humour and imagery of adverts, and the style and nature of the depictions when assessing the risk of causing serious harm or widespread offence to consumers.

FOOD AND DRINK 1. Pepsico International, 14 July 2010 (Pepsi Max advert considered too fantastical to cause harm or offence) 2. Tesco Stores Limited, 21 July 2010 (considered the claim "Fresh bread. Baked from scratch in our in store bakery" misleading) HEALTH AND BEAUTY 3. L'Oreal (UK) Limited, 7 July 2010 (TV advert for skin cream found the claim "inspired by the science of genes" not to be misleading) 4. Simply Organic, 28 July 2010 (considered that claims "Simply Organic" and "Naturally Organic" were likely to mislead) 5. Healthy Bowels Company Limited, 21 July 2010 (product-specific evidence required to support health claims) OTHER 6. Virgin Media Ltd, 28 July 2010 (considered the claims" For a one-off set up fee of £49" and "No monthly fee" misleading) 7. Wonga.com Ltd, 14 July 2010 (TV advert for loan company trivialised the nature and implications of the product) 8. Paddy Power plc, 21 July 2010 (TV advert found not to be offensive when referring to or involving people with a disability) 9. ASDA Stores Ltd, 14 July 2010 (TV advert breached Code by presenting rights given to consumers in law as distinctive features of the adverts offer) 10. BMW (UK) Ltd, 28 July 2010 ("green claims" considered to be misleading) NON-COMMERCIAL 11. Telegraph Media Group t/a The Daily Telegraph, 21 July 2010 (definition of "free" considered)

FOOD AND DRINK 1. Pepsico International, 14 July 2010

A TV and Video on Demand (VOD) advert for Pepsi Max showed a woman and a man sitting near each other at a bar. A breaking news story then played on the bar's TV and a reporter said "I can now officially confirm that a huge asteroid is on a collision course with Earth and will destroy all life". The reporter then said "Reach out to someone, anyone who's near, show them you love them. Don't be alone". The woman and the man then looked at each other for a moment before she ran towards him and they kissed as they fell to the floor. The advert then cut to the bar's kitchen where the barman and the reporter from the TV were shown in a fake news studio. They were revealed to be friends of the man from the bar as he walked in. The "reporter" asked him "And?", the man replied "Thank you guys, I love you". Music played and all three men were then shown dancing and drinking the product. On-screen text stated "MAX IT!" above a product shot.

Complaint/decision

The ASA received 49 complaints, challenging whether the advert was harmful because it condoned deception as a means of obtaining sex, condoned rape and promoted casual sex. The advert was also challenged for being offensive because it was believed the advert was sexist, portraying women as sex objects and men as sexual predators. The ASA rejected the complaints. The ASA considered the advert to be too fantastical to be imitated by viewers. The ASA also noted that the men in the advert did not use physical coercion and the woman had chosen to run to the man. The ASA considered that the woman was shown to take the initiative in the encounter rather than being depicted as intimidated or acting against her will. The ASA therefore concluded the advert was not harmful in the manner suggested by the complaints.

In addition, the ASA noted that serious coercion or violence was not used, threatened or implied. The men were depicted as comic rather predatory. It was also noted that...