Advertising Standards Bureau Review of Operations 2014 | Page 67
The Independent Reviewer considered that the
Board must make its determination based on the
content of an advertisement as it stands, regardless
of any back-story suggested by the advertiser
and that in this case the Board had given proper
consideration to the settings of the advertisement
(informal gatherings of families and friends).
However, the Independent Reviewer considered
the Board had failed to provide any indication
in its determination that it considered “whether
members of the community in the target audience
would most likely take a message condoning
excess consumption” as required by Practice Note
2.2 and for this reason recommended that the
Board reconsider its decision.
In reconsidering this case, the Board maintained
the strong view that the amount of food shown
in the advertisement normalised large portion
sizes and was disproportionate for the settings
portrayed, but noted there was no depiction of
people eating to excess. In view of this the Board
considered that the target audience would not
take a message condoning excess consumption
and did not breach Section 2.2 of the Food Code
but noted that its original determination to
uphold the advertisement under S1.1 of the QSRI
remained in place.
Witchery - Case number 0136/14
A request for an independent review from the
advertiser claimed there was a substantial flaw
in the process by which the determination was
made. The request specifically claimed that the
Board had given undue weight to the model’s
skirt length and angle of the image and failed to
consider that the still image captures the model
dancing and had not referenced the video which
features the model dancing. In recommending
that the Board’s original decision be confirmed
the Independent Reviewer noted that the
Board’s determination was based not simply on
the length of the skirt but also on the model’s
legs being apart, rendering the pose “more adult
than child-like” and that the camera angle used
highlighted the shortness of the skirt and that
this combination of elements was reflected in
the Board’s comment that: “overall the image
amounted to a depiction of a child which is
sexualised and is therefore not appropriate”. In
addition the Independent Reviewer noted that the
Board acted properly in wholly concentrating its
consideration on the still image and not the video,
as the video was not the advertisement subject to
the original complaint.
Advertising Standards Bureau - outline of requests for independent review 2014
CASE
INITIAL BOARD
DETERMINATION
INDEPENDENT REVIEWER RECOMMENDATION
BOARD
DETERMINATION
ON REVIEW
(if appropriate)
TIME TAKEN TO
COMPLETE REVIEW
In March 2011, ASB accepted a recommendation from the Review of the Independent Reviewer process that timeliness of the process should be made publicly
available. The times indicated below refer to the time between ASB receipt of the request for review to notification of final case report.
Kittens Car Wash
Summer billboard
Case number - 0437/14
Complaints Dismissed
November 2014
Independent Reviewer declined to accept the request as
it did not meet grounds for review
3 business days
Valvoline
Hoon driving
Case number - 0192/14
Complaints Upheld
May 2014
Independent Review declined to accept the request as it
did not meet grounds for review
4 business days
YUM
Excess consumption
Case number - 0154/14
Complaints Upheld
May 2014
Independent Reviewer recommended Board review its
original determination
June 2014
Witchery
(Witchery Kids)
Case number - 0136/14
Complaints Upheld
April 2014
Independent Reviewer recommended initial Board
determination be confirmed
June 2014
Review of Operations 2014
Upheld
24 business days
15 business days
65