Advertising Standards Bureau Review of Operations 2015

DETERMINATION TRANSPORT EDUCATORS CODES CONSUMERS ADAPTABLE EDUCATORS SOCIAL MEDIA COOPERATING BILLBOARDS ASSOCIATING GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY LIAISING INTEGRITY CINEMA INDUSTRY TRAINING STANDARDS PEOPLE TRANSPORT BRIDGING -- A television advertisement which featured other in an open collared shirt (Club INDEPENDENT the words ‘make it bigger and longer’ Shoop – 0153/15). SOCIAL MEDIA CONSUMERS (Advanced Medical Institute – 0216/15). -- A print advertisement which CODES • e depiction of high-profile public personas Th in mildly sexualised poses, if consistent with the imagery in the show or performance they are advertising, is not considered in breach of the Code. -- • -- television advertisement for a dating A site for married people to have an affair which showed a man swiping a tablet to view images of different women (Ashley Maddison – 0036/15 and 0071/15). Although relevant to the product or service being advertised, advertisements can still cross the line of acceptability if the use of sex, sexuality and nudity is too explicit. The Board’s view was: • dvertisements for lingerie can breach A section 2.4 of the Code if they are overly sexualised and not appropriate for a broad audience. -- -- • featured images of vibrators next to a topless woman lying on a bed (SindeRellas – 0243/15). • television advertisement for a music A awards show which featured a popular performer in different outfits, sometimes topless with nipples covered (MTV Networks Australia Pty Ltd – 0392/15). dvertising for dating sites which are only A mildly sexual will not be seen to breach Section 2.4 of the Code. window poster featured an image of A a woman wearing black leather style lingerie and similarly styled handcuffs on her wrists posing with one finger in her mouth (Honey Birdette – 0052/15). window poster featured a woman A wearing lingerie standing with her bent knee resting on the lap of Santa who is bound and gagged on a chair, with the accompanying text, ‘Silent night…’ (Honey Birdette – 0505/15). dvertising for sexual performance enhancers A can cross the line of acceptability if the use of sex, sexuality and nudity is too explicit. -- mobile billboard with a picture of two A women holding hands with both women wearing underwear, one in a bra and the Review of Operations 2015 wo radio advertisements for sexual T performance aids which repeatedly used overly sexualised language (Advanced Medical Institute – 0304/15 and 0482/15). -- social-media advertisement which A depicted two women and the phrase ‘two is always better than one, right?’ (Monster Beverage Corporation – 0084/15). -- romotional material that included a P drawn image of a woman consuming a drink and the text ‘suck some down at the machine then go & refill’ (7-Eleven Stores Pty Ltd – 0226/15). Humour and sexual innuendo Humour and sexual innuendo in advertisements considered by the Board generally raised questions of whether the advertisement was appropriate for a broad audience which could include children. The Board’s view was: • • dvertising with mild sexual references, A which would not easily be understood to be sexual by children, were seen to treat the issue of sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience. -- n online advertisement which featured A a variety of scenes, including brief images of an inflatable doll and a reference to ‘adult toys’ as well as a reference to ‘boobs’ (Amaysim Australia PtyLtd – 0123/15). -- series of radio advertisements for a A super fund received complaints for using double entendre with the word ‘nuts’ (Squirrel Super – 0167/15). -- number of advertisements showing A women in traditional Bavarian costumes, including phases like ‘make mein a duble’ (Urban Purveyor Group – 0142/15), ‘wunderbra’ (Urban Purveyor Group – 0182/15 and 0184/15), ‘bigger is better’ (Urban Purveyor Group - 0276/15), ‘keep between the posts’ (Urban Purveyor Group – 0275/15) and images of women in traditional and classic costumes (Urban Purveyor Group – 0238/15 and 0239/15). lthough legally allowed to be advertised, sex A industry advertisements can breach Section 2.4 of the code if they are overly sexualised and/or depict a high level of nudity. -- phrases and gestures, including shaking the drink until the lid popped off (Frucor Beverages Australia – 0076/15), the phrase ‘first time grip’ (Frucor Beverages Australia – 0099/15) and the phrase ‘can you handle it?’ (Frucor Beverages Australia – 0075/15). -- series of advertisements which made A suggestive comments about the size of a new drink container, along with suggestive • dvertisements which use double entendre, A where a non-sexualised explanation of the meaning would be taken away by children, was seen to treat the issue of sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience. -- print advertisement for soil treatment A which featured an image of a pair of jeans unbuttoned and unzipped and included the words ‘more action in your furrow’ (SST Australia Pty Ltd - 0150/15). -- e Board also dismissed a number of Th complaints about an advertisement for a streaming site, which made mention of a woman’s ‘big pussy’ showing a large cat on her lap (Stan – 0208/15 and 0222/15). -- dvertisements with subtle sexual A innuendo, which would not easily be understood by a young audience, included: Whitford Property (0229/15), Ingogo (0260/15), Nando’s Australia Pty Ltd (0410/15), Sportsbet (0119/15), Matee Turkish Restaurant (0027/15), Club Group Pty Ltd (0341/15), Mojo Homes (0377/15), Virtual Scaffolding (0399/15), Key Factors (0447/15) and Stan (0463/15). While some adults would prefer not to be confronted by sexual references, where these are unlikely to be understood by children and treat the is

Advertising Standards Bureau Review of Operations 2015 | Page 39