Advertising Complaints

Nightwish

Anyone read the Advertising Standards Authority's report thats published every month or so in the papers? Some of the complaints are a little ridiculous.
They upheld complaints about the very funny Carte D'or ad with the demented granny. I mean I know that this issue can be a little sensitive but come on, its a funny ad.
Also people complained about the Guinness ad where the man swims across to New York cos it offended people who thought showing a man jumping off the cliffs of moher was insensitive to suicide victims. this is a subject v. close to me and the thought NEVER entered my mind when seeing the ad

And, this is sad, people complained about the AIB "Please don't let them be up" ad cos they thought it promoted promiscuity??? WTF???

what are your feelings on this?
have you ever objected to an ad because it offended you?


BTW mods could this thread be moved?
I posted it the wrong forum by accident

snappieT

I can see the Guinness ad POV, but the others seem perfectly fine to me.

I have lodged complaints with the ASAI before, but each time it was in relation to false information, never because of personal feelings towards the advert.

Sleepy

Some people really have nothing better to do with their lives. I loved that "Please don't let them be up" ad, though I thought it was Bank of Ireland? It got the point of their advert across to the age-group they were targetting in a funny (and true to life) fashion.

The only ads I've seen recently that I'd like banned are the blatantly misandrist ones (e.g. the Flash ads) or the exploitative ring tone ads which couldn't be more obviously targeting children if they tried.

Kell

snappieT wrote:

I can see the Guinness ad POV,

Please explain how it is potentially insensitive to survivors of suicide? You dont see the guy jump.

K-

28064212

Sleepy wrote:

The only ads I've seen recently that I'd like banned are the blatantly misandrist ones (e.g. the Flash ads)

Misandrist???

Sleepy

It's the male version of mysogninist i.e. female chauvinistic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=misandrist

dglancy

I only ever complained once about an ad and my complaint was rejected! Which didn't bother me too much as I only complained to see what would happen.

I complained about a O2 poster at a bus stop which advertised text messages at 7.5cent. I argued that it was impossible to charge .5c so is the price 7c or 8c. But the advertising standards board said that it was obvious that the price would be rounded. But which way? They said they 'assumed' it was 7c.

Eoin

Kell wrote:

Please explain how it is potentially insensitive to survivors of suicide? You dont see the guy jump.
K-

It is clearly inferred. He is looking over the cliff in one scene, and in the water the next. I think the cliffs in question are renowned for being a place where young makes commit suicide, so I can see the point of view. The advert in question would lose nothing if they chopped that part out.

Can't think of any ads that particularly offend me as such, but certainly loads that annoy me (ring tones, Harvey Norman etc). The AIB advert is quite good, but annoys me just because I hate the sound of people snogging.

Actually, the adverts that I really hate are not Irish, but they are the ones for the English loan companies - actually came up in an earlier thread recently. Nothing but glorified loan sharks who are looking to re-possess vulnerable peoples' homes. They are given a sheen of respectability just because they have the likes of Carol Vorderman whoring herself out to them. But like I said, these aren't Irish adverts, so I guess they don't count.

BTW, "Misandrist": thanks for the new word Sleepy

MorningStar

28064212 wrote:

Misandrist???

Get used to it it's going to become real popular

bp_me

dglancy wrote:

I only ever complained once about an ad and my complaint was rejected! Which didn't bother me too much as I only complained to see what would happen.

I complained about a O2 poster at a bus stop which advertised text messages at 7.5cent. I argued that it was impossible to charge .5c so is the price 7c or 8c. But the advertising standards board said that it was obvious that the price would be rounded. But which way? They said they 'assumed' it was 7c.

o2 allow you to buy bundles of 100 or 200 messages for eur7.50 or eur 15.00 respectively. Therefore making each text cost 7.5c. The ad is accurate.

simu

Nightwish wrote:

And, this is sad, people complained about the AIB "Please don't let them be up" ad cos they thought it promoted promiscuity??? WTF???

There was a letter in the Irish Times today (Friday) stating that handing condoms out free at Oxygen (or whatever the gimmicky spelling is) was an affront to human dignity or some such nonsense. Ireland houses some very odd people with nothing better to do that write these sorts of complaints. Personally, I'd rather have a good rant on boards when I get annoyed!

rsynnott

simu wrote:

There was a letter in the Irish Times today (Friday) stating that handing condoms out free at Oxygen (or whatever the gimmicky spelling is) was an affront to human dignity or some such nonsense. Ireland houses some very odd people with nothing better to do that write these sorts of complaints. Personally, I'd rather have a good rant on boards when I get annoyed!

Stephen Fry, under the guise of Professor Donald Trefusis, wrote a lovely rant about this and broadcast it on BBC a few years back. He too disapproves of the lunatic fringe being in charge of censorship. It's in one of his books, well worth reading.

JohnDigital

I work in advertising and our office would get 2 or sometimes 3 ASAI complaints a month. It is so funny what people decide to complain about, but sad in other ways. Lots of complaints are made by the elderly or infirm, who have misunderstood what the advert was supposed to be about in the first place.

Lots of others are made by extremely religious people who blame advertising for the corruption of decency and the cause of everything that is wrong in the world.

Many complaints are from the same people over and over again concerning the content of different commercials. The advertising agency gets to see the actual complaint written by the complainant, but the version we get has the complainants details censored – but reading the same handwriting you get to know it was the same as last time….

Some other complaints are from competitors of the advertiser who just want to pee on their parade. These sorts of complaints are very rarely upheld, as there is often little basis for the original complaint.

The Irish and UK advertising industries actually have some of the strictest rules and guidelines in place concerning accuracy of content of a creative execution.

All broadcast commercials have a very detailed copy clearance procedure to go through so it is rare that a complaint against a commercial will actually be upheld by the ASAI. All content will be quite rigorously checked and detailed substantiating documentation has to be supplied in many cases long before the ad goes on air so you can be sure that an advertisier can stand behind any claims made in an ad.

Victor

JohnDigital wrote:

Lots of others are made by extremely religious people who blame advertising for the corruption of decency and the cause of everything that is wrong in the world.

And they'd be right

JohnDigital wrote:

All broadcast commercials have a very detailed copy clearance procedure to go through so it is rare that a complaint against a commercial will actually be upheld by the ASAI. All content will be quite rigorously checked and detailed substantiating documentation has to be supplied in many cases long before the ad goes on air so you can be sure that an advertisier can stand behind any claims made in an ad.

But they still get it wrong.....

JohnDigital wrote:

The Irish and UK advertising industries actually have some of the strictest rules and guidelines in place concerning accuracy of content of a creative execution.

.... which makes one understand why such rules are needed.

RuggieBear

i made a complaint alittle while back and more or less got a PFO. Wasn't very impressed by the standard of their investigation. Then again i suppose it wasn't a really important subject being advertised (a movie):)

nesf

I think I heard about this on the radio a few years back. The advertising commission were trying to explain how just one (or something small anyways) complaint would mean they had to withdraw the ad. They themselves are "neutral" in this. They just have to uphold legitimate complaints.

The problem is, that their hands are tied a lot of the time with regard to this stuff. If a small group of people complain, then they can have their way about things, it's the way the system is set up.


As per the Guinness ad, meh, it didn't bother me personally, but I could see how it might upset some people. Plus, the main reasoning iirc was that jumping off the cliff was in no way essential to the ad, the guy could walk into the sea at a beach and the message could still be got across. So the ad was editted rather than withdrawn or something iirc.

Although, it was one of the more understandable examples. There are others that just make little sense.


Censorship is a very hard thing to get right, to be fair though. Its not easy to decide what should be banned outright and what people should be able to make up their own minds on.

I'm fairly against most censorship, but I'm very much in favour of certain things not being available in this country, kiddie porn is the most obvious one but there are others. So, in essence, I'm just drawing a line arbitrarily myself tbh.

Matamoros

ASAI, don't make me laugh. The S is for Standards believe it or not. This is our capitalist system, we are stuck with it. In order for one to succeed, others must fail. It was a relative of Sigmund Freud who brought ideas about the sub-conscious mind into advertising with spectacular results especially in the "Torches of Freedom" campaign which promoted cigarette smoking amongst American women which had been mostly popular among men. I look at it all this way, my motto in life is nowadays "Caveat Emptor", let the buyer beware. Advertising and Marketeers aren't there for you, they are there for themselves and their families, if they can exploit your weaknesses, they will, sometimes at the cost of your life. Having said that, if a company had just had a successful campaign and in turn you got a job when they needed to hire, maybe you would have a different view. For a laugh on this subject, try Bill Hicks. I miss him.