United Kingdom

[GB] App Advertisement inappropriately Scheduled and Offensive

IRIS 2014-4:1/18

David Goldberg

deeJgee Research/Consultancy

The adjudication by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), dated 19 February 2014, concerns a television advertisement for a mobile app, called "Nude Scanner 3D". It had been placed by Jesta Digital GmbH t/a Jamster.

It was shown during six episodes of a programme called “Hollyoaks.” The advertisement portrayed a “clothed woman holding an umbrella. A hand appeared which held a mobile phone. The phone then 'scanned' the woman which revealed her naked with her breasts and crotch blurred [pixelated] out. The naked image then rotated, showing the woman from the waist up.” There was a voice- over saying that this was a way of playing a practical joke (a “prank”) on one’s friends.

The advertisement had been cleared by Clearcast with an “ex-kids restriction”, i.e., clearing the advertisement but with the caveat that it could not be broadcast during children’s programmes.

The ASA did not find that that the advertisement would encourage “anti-social” behaviour - BCAP Code rules 1.2 (Responsible advertising) 4.9 (Harm and offence) and 5.4 (Children).

However, it did find in favour of the complainants in respect of: (a) the claims that the advertisement was inappropriately scheduled (using evidence derived from the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board (BARB); and (b) the advertisement was “likely to cause serious or widespread offence” and so the ASA concluded that it “should not have been broadcast at any time, including during programmes of particular appeal to children.” - BCAP Code rules 4.1 and 4.2 (Harm and offence) 32.1 (Scheduling of television and radio advertisements) and 32.3 (Under-16s).

The adjudication concluded that the advertisement “must not appear again in its current form.” and that the company should ensure that “future advertising was not demeaning to women and contained nothing that was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.”


References


This article has been published in IRIS Legal Observations of the European Audiovisual Observatory.