Latest decisions: offensive language, therapeutic claims and more
19 December 2023
The following are the latest decisions from the ASA.
Settled Complaints: The advertiser has amended or removed the advertisement after receiving the complaint.
Complaint 23/283 Zestt Wellness Digital Marketing, Settled
Complaint 23/289 Immersion Cosmetics, Digital Marketing, Settled
Complaint 23/292 The Warehouse Limited, Digital Marketing, Settled
Complaint 23/298 Hostpapa, Digital Marketing, Settled
Complaint 23/302 The Car Company Nelson, Facebook, Settled
Complaint 23/308 MitoQ, Website and Social Media, Settled
Complaint 23/312 Container Door NZ, On Demand, Facebook, Settled
Upheld Complaints: The Complaints Board agreed with the complainant that the advertisement breached the Advertising Codes. The advertiser has been asked to remove or amend it.
Complaint 23/295 Restore Passenger Rail, Poster, Upheld
Not Upheld Complaints: The Complaints Board found the ad did not breach the Advertising Codes in relation to the complainant’s concerns.
Complaint 23/273 ANZ New Zealand (ANZ), Television, Not Upheld
Complaint 23/291 I am Hope, Radio, Not Upheld
No Further Action: The Chair of the Complaints Board reviewed the ad and the complaint, and ruled the issues raised are not a breach of the Advertising Codes.
Complaint 23/125 Bigsave Furniture, On Demand, No Further Action
Complaint 23/153 LDM Motor Group, Facebook, No Further Action
Complaint 23/250 Air New Zealand, Live Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/296 Viking Cruises, Live Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/299 Imperial Brands, British American Tobacco New Zealand and Save Our Stores, Facebook, No Further Action
Complaint 23/300 Life and Unichem Pharmacy, Green Cross Health, Live Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/301 Afterpay NZ Ltd, Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/304 Lifestylers Farm Fencing, Radio, No Further Action
Complaint 23/305 The Trusts, Liquorland and Super Liquorland, Digital Marketing, No Further Action
Complaint 23/310 Coloursteel, On Demand, No Further Action
Complaint 23/311 Brand Developers Ltd, Slix Pilates, Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/313 Skycity, Radio, No Further Action
Complaint 23/315 McDonalds, Live Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/316 IAG Insurance, AMI, Live Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/317 IAG Insurance, AMI, Live Television, No Further Action
Complaint 23/319 Showerdome Ltd, Radio, No Further Action
Complaint 23/320 Tauranga City Council, Radio, No Further Action
Complaint 23/321 Laithwaites Wines, Digital Marketing, No Further Action
Complaint 23/322 Boring Oak Milk, NZ Herald Website and OnDemand, No Further Action
Decision Summaries
Each month we summarise two decisions from the above list
Use of profanity in Restore Passenger Rail posters breached Code
Complaint 23/295 Restore Passenger Rail, Poster, Upheld
The Complaints Board have upheld two complaints regarding a Restore Passenger Rail poster, ruling the language used in the advertisement was gratuitous and likely to cause offence in an unrestricted medium.
The poster advertisement for Restore Passenger Rail stated “So Now We’re Fucked. What Next.” The N in the word “now” was replaced with the National Party logo.
Two Complainants were concerned the poster contained objectionable and offensive language in a public place.
In their response, the Advertiser said the ad was designed to be used around a university campus, speaking to students in their own language regarding the climate change crisis, and had received hundreds of positive responses which outweighed any complaints.
The Complaints Board considered the complaints and referenced three precedent decisions regarding use of offensive language, all of which had been Upheld.
The Complaints Board unanimously agreed the ad was likely to cause offence to some consumers, and stated the prominent and deliberate use of the profanity was gratuitous, designed to attract attention and was not essential to the advertiser’s message. The Complaints Board noted despite the Advertiser’s statement the ad was designed for use on a university campus, Complainants had reported viewing the posters in other locations including Christchurch CBD.
The Complaints Board Upheld the complaints, with the advertisement to be removed and not used again in its current form.
Our Get It Right the First Time Guide on Offensive Language provides guidance on making responsible, language-appropriate ads.
MitoQ ad removed following concerns it made unsubstantiated claims
Complaint 23/308 MitoQ, Website and Social Media, Settled
MitoQ have removed an advertisement and restricted access to their social media marketing following concerns their website and Facebook advertisements contained unsubstantiated claims.
The Advertisement included claims such as “Your mind and body should feel the difference in 90 days!” and claims around brain health. The Complainant was concerned the advertisement contained claims that were inappropriate to be used for a dietary supplement.
In their response, the Advertiser confirmed it had removed the advertisement from their website, and also noted the Facebook advertisement had not been intended for a New Zealand audience. The Advertiser confirmed measures had been taken to create a social media account for New Zealand consumers and geo-restrict paid posts targeting consumers in the USA.
Given the self-regulatory action of the Advertiser in removing the advertisement and further restricting their social media advertising, the Chair ruled the complaint was Settled.
Our Quick Guide: Can’t Prove It? Don’t Say It! gives our top tips on ensuring your advertising claims are Code-compliant.
