ASA's 2015 Most Complained Campaigns #10

At number 10 on the Advertising Standards Authority's list of Top 10 most complained about advertising campaigns of 2015 is Omega Pharma Ltd. With the advertising campaign bringing in 136 complaints it resulted with being Upheld and remove it.

The advertising campaign using TV, YouTube and VOD for the medical device, XLS Medical, featured two female friends exchanging text messages about losing weight in time for the summer holidays. One of the women says she has lost weight thanks to XLS Medical, which she says could help users lose up to three times more weight than dieting alone. The second actress then looks in the mirror frowning and says "Urgh. I'll never fit into my holiday wardrobe". At the end of the advert, both women are shown on holiday posing together for a photo. The company said the final image of the women showed they had reached their “healthy target weight”, with both having a Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than 19 kg/m².

The main complaints that came in was that the advert was addressed or likely to appeal to those under 18 years of age because it had used actresses whom they believed were under the age of 18. Also complaints that the video advert was irresponsible because it promoted an unhealthy body image, particularly amongst young girls.

Due to this, the ASA told the company its adverts must not appear again in their current form. The Advertising Standards Authority said in a ruling “We told Omega Pharma Ltd to take care to ensure their products were advertised in a socially responsible way,”. In a statement, the company said it had never meant to “cause offence, simply to highlight the variety of healthy weight-loss and weight-maintenance goals and motivations XLS-Medical can support with”. "Across all of our communications we ensure that we represent a range of body shapes, ages and sizes, to acknowledge where our consumers might be on their own weight loss journey. As part of ad development we work with an independent weight management consultant to ensure we deliver positive and appropriate messages,” it said.

The company claimed the exchange of text messages portrayed normal preparations for a holiday, which a change in diet may be part of. Yet ASA said the worry of the actress that she may not fit into her holiday wardrobe was likely to be interpreted by viewers as meaning she needed to lose weight, despite her already slim and healthy appearance.

The complainants, which included representative body for naturists in the UK British Naturism, also said the actresses used appeared to be under 18, increasing the likelihood of appeal to this age group.
Yet defending itself, Omega Pharma said the actresses featured were aged 24 and 29.
The company said they were representative users of the medical device, seeking an effective “helping hand” for weight management ahead of their holiday.

Leave a comment below if you agree with the complaints that were made against this advert. Do you agree that it should have been removed? Do you believe that it creates an unhealthy body image, especially with young girls?

This content is copyright protected

However, if you would like to share the information in this article, you may use the headline, summary and link below:

Omega Pharma criticised for pushing poor body image in slimming ads

By Annie-Rose Harrison-Dunn+ Annie Harrison-Dunn, 05-Feb-2016

The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) says adverts for Omega Pharma’s weight management aid presents an “irresponsible approach to body image and confidence”.

http://www.nutraingredients.com/Regulation-Policy/Omega-Pharma-criticised-for-pushing-poor-body-image-in-slimming-ads

      

ASA's 2015 Most Complained Campaigns #8

At number 8 on the Advertising Standards Authorities list of top 10 most complained about campaigns of 2015 is the advertising campaign for the Department of health. the advert received around 200 complaints which the advertising campaign ran. The advert was shown on television and on the Video on demand service and was a part of an anti smoking campaign from Public health England. The advert showed a man rolling a cigarette, however it was not a normal cigarette, the insides of the cigarette was filled with blood and flesh which many viewers found too graphic for television viewing. The Department of health's advertising campaign also including a poster advert which also showed a cigarette which contained flesh.

The Advertising Standards Authority received complaints that the adverts were graphic and gruesome and were therefore offensive and irresponsible. Although the ASA acknowledged that some people might find the advertisements unsettling but noted that they also contained an important health message. therefore it was concluded that the advertising campaign was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.

WARNING graphic content.

What do you think about the Department of Health advertising campaign using the image shown below. Do you feel that these images are too graphic and gruesome to be shown or do you feel that that is how it should be in order to get the message across of just how harmful smoking is?

please leave your comments below sharing your views and opinions

ASA's 2015 Most Complained Campaigns #6

d

Coming in at sixth place in the Advertising Standards Agency's "Top 10 most complained about adverts of 2015" is the memorable advert for the British Heart Foundation. This advert received 219 complaints after being shown on television, on demand and in cinema adverts. 

The advert consists of a young boy sitting in a classroom when he sees his dad standing infront of him. The boy is confused to why his dad is there and his dad says "I wont be around anymore", " i'm sorry" and "look after your mum". the dad then disappears and the head teacher appears at the door with news for the boy. It then turns out that the boys dad had died of a heart attach and was not actually in front of him and that was his head teacher arriving to tell the boy the news. 

Complaints arose after people saw the advert to be distressing for both adults and children to see as it is such a strong powerful and sad story. it is not sugar coated in any way and the advert shows the brutal truth to get the message across that "heart disease is heartless" and it can strike without warning. 

The advertising standards authority recognised that some people might find the ad upsetting but judged it was unlikely to cause widespread distress. Although this was recognised, the Advertising Standards Authority decided to result this advert as Not Upheld. However, it was noted that the advert had been scheduled to not appear around children's programming as it was not appropriate and may be too distressing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQtz2wYBFsE

click the link above to watch the advert for the British Heart Foundation and see what you think of it. Do you find this advert more disturbing than powerful? Do you see the message that the advert is trying to put across?

ASA's 2015 Most Complained Campaigns #5

Coming in at number 5 on the Advertising Standards Authorities Top 10 most complained about campaigns in 2015 is Protein World UK. This campaign gathered 380 complaints throughout a short period for the message and photographs they the company were displaying on their advertisement materials.

The campaign used women with the perfect toned athletic body and spread the message "Are you beach body ready?"  and was displayed on the London Underground. This Campaign created a protest in Hyde Park, London, which was created to go against the advert over claims that it was "body-shaming" and that it "aimed to make individuals feel physically inferior to the unrealistic image of the bronzed model".

A Change.org petition campaigning for the removal of the advert reached almost 50,000 signatures within just a few days and attracted condemnation from high profile figures such as TV presenter Susannah Reid. Beat, the charity that supports people with eating disorders also criticised the campaign. They called it "one more example of how we are subjected daily to what we are expected to accept and aspire to as the 'body ideal"'.

Before the ASA even began investigating the complaints that a poster featuring a woman in a bikini was offensive, they told Protein World that due to its concerns about a range of health and weight loss claims, then the ad could not appear again in its current form. The ASA recognised that "beach body" was a relatively well understood term that for some people had connotations of a toned, athletic physique similar to the image of the model in the ad. They also considered that it also had a broader meaning - that of feeling sufficiently comfortable and confident with one's physical appearance to wear swimwear in a public environment.  The ASA concluded, however, that that ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.

Please leave a comment discussing your views and opinions on the London Underground poster campaign for Protein world? Do you feel they were body shaming? Would you have signed the petitions against them?

ASA's 2015 Most Complained Campaigns #3

Coming in at number three on the Advertising Standards Authority "Top 10 most complained about advertisements of 2015" is the Christmas PayPal advert. This advert attracted 464 complaints over the Christmas period while it was being shown.

The adverts consisted of two young children who were concerned that they weren't getting Christmas presents this year as they had not seen their parents go shopping for Christmas presents . The main idea of this advertisement is that the parents did not need to go shopping as they purchased all of their presents this year through PayPal with the tagline "Check out before they know it". 

However, complaints arose concerns that the advert revealed the truth about Father Christmas as they believed that since the parents were not purchasing any gifts that they would not receive any at all. This caused parents to complain and worry that if their children were watching this advert, they might start to think that Father Christmas was not real. The complaints caused concern over the timing that the advert was shown on television as it was at peak times such as 5pm/6pm which meant that the advert could not be avoided by children. 

Although this advert gathered a large number of complaints over the short period that the advert was aired on television, the ASA resulted the advert as not upheld as they believed the advert did no harm and did not make it clear about the truth about Father Christmas. However after the complaints arose and word spread across social media regarding the negative advert, PayPal decided to independently change the scheduling of the advertisement in order to avoid the times that children may see the advertisements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdu0WKIhjeU

click the link above to watch the advert. Please comment below how you feel about the advert and if you feel that it reveals the truth about Father Christmas. Would you have complained about this advert?

ASA's 2015 Most Complained Campaigns #2

In the Advertising Standards Agency list of most complained adverts in 2015. The company "Booking.com" appeared three times in the list! Taking the spaced of number two, four and seven in the top 10 list of most complained about ads. 

This television and cinema advert brought in 683 complaints before the ruling in 2015 however, more complaints have been sent in about this advert since then. The complaints were mainly that the advert was offensive and encouraged bad language especially amongst children as the advert used a play on words where the word "booking" was used to replace a swear word. This was meant to be a light hearted play on words however, many of the public took great offence and did not find the humour behind making a joke around bad language as if it was making it okay which sent a bad message to children. 

The advert featured scenes of various people arriving at their holiday destinations. The voice-over script went like this:

, "This holiday has been a year in the planning. And here you are standing, nay staring down your dreams. The rest of your holiday hinges on the moment you walk through that door. The door opens, you hold your breath and then you realise. You got it right. You got it booking right. Because it doesn't get any better than this. It doesn't get any booking better than this. Look at the view, look at the booking view. This is exactly what you booking needed. Bask in the booking glory at over half a million properties. Planet earth's number one accommodation site. Booking dot com, booking dot yeah." 

The majority of complainants, who believed the word "booking" had been substituted in place of a swear word, challenged whether the ads were offensive. A number of complainants challenged whether the ads were irresponsible because they were likely to condone or encourage swearing amongst children. People also complained that it was scheduled inappropriately as it was shown during the adverts of films such as Harry Potter and Night at the museum; meaning that children would most definitely be seeing the advert. 

However, as a result, the ASA did not uphold the advert, judging that it was a light hearted play on words that couldn't be mistaken for an actual swear word.  it was also ruled that the ad was unlikely to encourage swearing amongst children as any children that did pick up on the joke were unlikely to have learned bad language through the ad itself as the word itself was not used. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4M-FhM49SU

follow the link above to have a look at the advert yourself and comment on what you think about the advert? do you think this advert is offensive in any way or encouraging the use of swear words?
Looking forward to discussing what everyone thinks about this advert and hearing all of the opinions on the topic

ASA's Most Complained Advert of 2015

Advertising Standards Authority Logo

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have just published the 2015 round up of the most complained about advertising campaigns of the year. The top 10 list of the advertising campaigns that caused the most amount of complaints may come as a shock to some or people may agree with them.

Moneysupermarket.com topped the list with a massive 1,513 complaints to the ASA website.  Moneysupermarket.com is a British price comparison online business which specialises in financial services. The website allows consumers to compare prices on a wide range of products, including mortgages, loans and credit cards.

Still picture from MoneySupermarket Advertisement

The advert which was circulated on social media, the internet and on television features a man called “Dave” walking down a street and dancing to the song “Don’t Cha” by the Pussycat Dolls. He is dressed in his work suit on his top half along with a pair high heels and short denim hot pants on his bottom half. The 60-second twerk-fest promotional video also stars former X Factor judge Sharon Osborne and her dog Mr Chips. The clip, which drew inspiration from the dance moves of Beyonce and Miley Cyrus, appeared in the breaks between popular television programmes such as "Take Me Out" and "Celebrity Big Brother." The advertising campaign's hashtag was soon trending all over social media with some comparing the campaign to the irritating opera singer from the GoCompare.com adverts.

The advert quickly got lots of coverage and spread around the internet and was shared all over social media, however most of the times for the wrong reasons. While some of the public managed to see the humorous side to the advert and understood the joke that the campaign was trying to put across by calling the promo "mesmerising" and the "best ad in the world". Some members of the public considered this dress code to be offensive and inappropriate due to his clothing and dance moves that caused many to believe that the content was “Overly sexual”. Some of the complaints say that they found the promotional campaign "Disturbing" and claimed that it made them want to throw up. 

While acknowledging that some viewers might have found the ad distasteful after it received twice as many complaints than its rivals, the Advertising Standard Authority did not judge the ad to be offensive and in breach of the Code. Therefore, this resulted in the advert being not upheld meaning that the MoneySupermarket promotional campaign could stay as it was and did not have to be changed or removed. 

Watch the promotional campaign video here and leave a comment telling me your opinion and if you find the advert offensive or humorous!
http://www.tvadmusic.co.uk/2015/01/moneysupermarket-daves-epic-strut/