ASA Watch

A pre-roll ad on YouTube for the film As Above, So Below seen before videos featuring characters iBallisticSquid and Stampylonghead, from the game Minecraft. The ad opened with images of dark tunnels in the Catacombs in Paris that were lined with skulls and bones. The ad then showed the characters exploring the tunnels and getting lost, followed by a sequence of shots of a distorted face with screams in the background. Other scenes featured a body hanging on a noose, a male character being thrown into a burning car and another male character attached to a rope being pulled down a vertical shaft.

A complainant, whose eight-year-old child saw the ad and became distressed by it, challenged whether the ad had been responsibly targeted because it appeared before videos which they believed would appeal to children.

ASA Assessment: Complaint Upheld

The ASA considered that the imagery and effects featured in the ad reflected the theme and premise of the film. We acknowledged that the content of the ad was not excessively shocking for viewers who were 18 years old and above and therefore was unlikely to cause distress to those viewers the advertiser had intended to target. However, we considered certain scenes in the ad, in particular those of the distorted and menacing faces accompanied by screaming, the man hanging on a noose and the male character being pulled into the burning car, would be likely to cause distress to young children.

We noted Universal Pictures' explanation of the measures that they had instructed YouTube to put in place, by using demographic targeting with the criteria being viewers aged 18 and above, and also implementing a secondary filter to ensure that the ad would be served on those who expressed an interest in horror and fantasy themed films.

We understood that a specific YouTube account had not been signed in to and that the safety mode had been activated at the time the complainant's son saw the ad. We also understood that the complainant's son had not been able to skip the ad. We noted that the ad appeared before YouTube videos featuring Minecraft characters, Stampylonghead and iBallisticsquid. We understood that although the game Minecraft did not have an audience that comprised exclusively children, the game was very popular among them. On this basis, we considered that these videos were highly likely to be of particular interest to children.

Although we noted the measures that Universal Pictures had taken in order to ensure that the ad would only be shown to an appropriate audience, we considered that given the possibility that viewers who were not signed into a YouTube account with particular viewing history, they could still be served the ad. Also, in this instance the ad appeared before videos that we considered were likely to appeal to young children, and therefore the ad had not been targeted appropriately. We concluded that the ad was in breach of the Code.

We told Universal Pictures International UK & Eire Ltd to ensure that future ads that were unsuitable for viewing by children were appropriately targeted.

A national press ad for Belvedere Vodka featured a group of friends on a night out, posing for a group photo. Tex stated THERE'S A NIGHT OUT. AND THERE'S A NIGHT OUT. BELVEDERE VODKA. KNOW THE DIFFERENCE . Issue

The complainant challenged whether the ad was irresponsible because they believed it implied that drinking alcohol was a key component of a night out.

ASA Assessment: Complaint Upheld

The ASA noted the ad featured a group of friends who appeared to be either at a bar or party and which showed most of the characters on a sofa with a woman lying across their knees. The image also featured one man in a masquerade mask, one with a maracas instrument and with his bow tie undone and another behind the group with an arm raised in celebration. The characters appeared to be posing for a group photo and in high spirits.

Whilst the ad did not feature any alcohol being consumed, we considered the very playful scene, alongside the text There's a night out. And there's a night out and the image of the Belvedere vodka bottle superimposed over the main image, suggested that alcohol had been consumed prior to the photo being taken and that alcohol was therefore partly responsible for the featured scene. Furthermore, in the context of an ad for vodka which featured an image of a people at a party, we considered the strapline There's a night out. And there's a night out would be understood by consumers as a reference to the enjoyment of a party or night out (such as the one featured in the image) with the vodka product being consumed, compared to the enjoyment of a night out without it. Whilst the ad did not make any references to excessive alcohol consumption, we considered the juxtaposition of the strapline, the image of the vodka bottle and the image of the group of people suggested that alcohol was the major element of the apparent success of the featured party. We therefore considered the ad implied that alcohol was a key component of a social event and concluded that the ad breached the Code.

The ad should not appear again in its current form.

A magazine ad for a telecommunications company, Andrews and Arnold , appeared in Linux Voice and featured text that stated, Home :: 1 BROADBAND F*CK FILTERING .

The complainant challenged whether it was irresponsible to show the ad in a publication whose readership included children. C

Andrews and Arnold Ltd stated the publication was not targeted at children. They said that its cover price was far more than those of magazines aimed at children. Furthermore, they said that the only other way the magazine could be purchased was via subscription, which required a card payment.

Andrews and Arnold said that the publication had no appeal to children and was a minority interest to adults, with a readership of approximately 8,000. They stated that although the magazine was predominantly technology based in nature, it included articles regarding topics that were not appropriate for children, such as brewing beer. This they believed demonstrated the magazine's adult only readership.

Linux Voice magazine stated that they had not received any direct complaints regarding the ad. They stated that the magazine was targeted at IT professionals and adult hobbyists and that its newsstand price was out of reach for children, and that a credit or debit card was required to buy a subscription. They said that there were many outspoken personalities in the Linux community who used such strong language, including its creator, when strong opinions were being expressed.

Linux Voice stated that internet filtering was an issue which many people were very passionate about, hence the use of strong language. They said that the wording was not directed at a person or group, but was a reaction to a policy, reflecting Linux users' opinions that internet filtering was unwanted.

Assessment: Complaint Not upheld

The ASA noted the expletive in the ad was partly obscured but considered the intended meaning was still clear. However, we noted that Andrews and Arnold and Linux Voice stated that the magazine was not targeted at children and considered that, given its pricing and subject matter, which included technical matters and topics that would not be of particular interest to children. It was targeted at IT professionals and adults with an interest in computer software. Therefore, we considered that the magazine in which the ad was published was unlikely to appeal to children and concluded that it's placement was not socially irresponsible.

A video shown before an online game on www.agame.com/game/bloppy, for Blu-Ray and DVDs of The Walking Dead Season Four , showed disfigured and decomposing zombies. A scene in the ad showed a zombie being run over by a fast moving vehicle with spluttering sounds and body parts flying up in the air. The ad then showed scenes of bloody bodies scattered and close up shots of zombies being shot, struck and stabbed. Issue

The complainant challenged whether the ad was:

1. offensive because it was excessively violent; and

2. unsuitable for a medium where it might be seen by children.

ASA Assessment

1. Not Upheld

The ASA noted that a number of scenes in the ad contained graphic details that showed exploding blood splatters with corresponding sounds of gun shots and flesh being cut, and depicted acts of violence such as shooting at close range and zombies being stabbed and struck.

We noted that the ad was for DVDs and Blu-Ray discs of a TV series, the premise of which was human survival in a post-apocalyptic world infested with zombies. On this basis, we considered that the imagery featured, which eOne stated were taken from the series, reflected the theme of the products advertised. Although we acknowledged that some might find the content of the ad to be offensive, we did not consider the level of violence and gore depicted to be excessive within the context of ads for programmes in the horror genre that had an 18 rating.

On this basis, we considered that the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence to viewers in general.

2. Upheld

We noted eOne's comments that they had informed their agency, who had in turn provided instructions to the video advertising platform, to ensure that the ad was targeted at an audience aged between 18 and 35. We also noted their comments that it was SPIL Games' responsibility to also ensure that the ads served on agame.com were appropriate for their target audience. We informed eOne that, although those involved in preparing or publishing marketing communications were obliged to comply with the CAP Code, the primary responsibility to observe the Code fell on advertisers.

We noted that the age restriction imposed by the terms of use on agame.com required that users under the age of 13 accessed the site under parental or guardian supervision. However, we noted that users were able to access all of the games on agame.com without age verification and that the data provided by SPIL Games showed a significant proportion of users were under 18 years of age.

We acknowledged eOne's comments that a number of games on agame.com were based on themes that were more suitable for adult players. However, we considered that many of the games on agame.com were likely to appeal to children.

We considered that the level of violence and graphic detail in the ad was not suitable for viewing by children. On this basis, we concluded that the ad had been inappropriately and irresponsibly shown on a medium where it might be seen by children.

An ad in the Bucks Free Press for an estate agent, featured an image of six women, from behind, wearing Whirlybird branded bikinis. Text stated Would you like one of the ladies at Whirlybird Property to value your home? if so, call now and take advantage of our preferential rates for selling your property . Issue

Two complainants, who believed the ads were sexist and objectified women, challenged whether the ad was offensive.

ASA Assessment: complaints upheld

Whilst the ASA noted the bikinis worn by the six women featured in the ad were Whirlybird Property branded, we considered the use of the image was incongruous to the subject of property lettings. Although the image was not sexually explicit; we considered that, alongside the text Would you like one of the ladies at Whirlybird to value your home? it was likely to be seen as sexist and demeaning to women because it used their physical features to draw attention to the product. We therefore concluded that, in this context, the image was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.

A poster for Dream Lounge ladies and gentlemen's club in Swindon featured an image of a woman from the waist down, taken from the side. The woman was shown leaning against a pole with one knee raised, and wearing stockings, suspenders and knickers. The woman's midriff and the side of her bottom were visible. Text on the poster stated Come and enjoy our intimate atmosphere at Swindon's Premier Nightspot .

A complainant, whose young child had seen the ad, objected that:

1. it was of an overtly sexual nature and likely to cause serious or widespread offence; and

2. it was unsuitable for public display where it could be seen by children.

ASA Assessment: Complaint not upheld

1. Not upheld

The ASA noted that the image featured a woman dressed in underwear and stockings, and was intended to promote a pole-dancing lounge. We noted that the woman was pictured from the side and that only her midriff and side of her bottom were uncovered and, although the model's pose was likely to be regarded as provocative, we considered that the general presentation of the image was sexually suggestive rather than overtly sexual. We acknowledged that some consumers might find the service and image distasteful, but did not consider that the ad was so sexual in nature as to be generally offensive or unsuitable for targeted outdoor advertising.

2. Not upheld

The ASA considered that, as the ad was sexually suggestive, it was unsuitable for untargeted public display where it was likely to be seen by children, and should be subject to a placement restriction to prevent it from appearing within 100 m of schools. However, we understood that in this instance the poster site reported by the complainant would not fall within such a restriction. We therefore concluded that the ad did not breach the Code.

A tweet on the GiffGaff mobile phone company Twitter feed, which could be accessed by an embedded feed on their own website, stated The situations in our new videos are, well, awkward. #NSFW [LINK] #alltheboss . Beneath this, a video was embedded in a player and a still, showing a topless man wearing earphones and looking into a room, was displayed. Underneath the video player text stated Out for a run - At home with your parents you're not the boss ... Dean returns hot and sweaty from a run and gets an eye full. At home with your parents you're not the boss and there was a link to where the video was hosted on an external site.

In the first two seconds of the video on-screen text in the bottom-left corner stated WARNING: You cannot unsee this . The video showed the interior of a house and a man entering wearing earphones and dressed in a damp T-shirt, which he removed. He pushed open a door, revealing a couple having sex in a laundry room. The video cut back to the man's reaction, and then again to the couple, before showing the man walking away looking dazed. The video then cut to a blank screen, on which text stated At home with your parents you're not the boss ... At giffgaff we're all the boss . During the video panting sounds could be heard, which continued over the blank screen section. Issue

The complainant, who considered that the content was sexually graphic, objected that the ad was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.

Giffgaff Ltd stated that it was not their intention to cause offence. They said the ad was intended to show in a humorous way that, although some of their customers may not feel like the boss while living at home with their parents, with the Giffgaff network they could be the boss because they are able to have a say in how it's run. They stated that the style of the ad was humorous and playful, and that there was no nudity. They also stated that there was a warning at the start of the video that stated Warning: You cannot unsee this, which served to alert viewers to the fact that it may not be to their taste. Giffgaff said that, according to YouTube statistics, the ad had been viewed 37,530 times at the point of providing their response and that the receipt of only one complaint indicated that the offence caused was not widespread or serious.

Twitter did not provide a comment on the content of the ad, but stated that it was an ordinary tweet posted by the advertiser rather than a paid-for tweet promoted by the site.

ASA Assessment: Complaint upheld

The ASA noted that the ad did not feature nudity. However, we considered that the characters were clearly having sex, that viewers would be likely to understand this to be the case, and that despite the lack of nudity the situation depicted was of a strongly sexual nature that would be likely to cause offence in an untargeted medium. Although we acknowledged Giffgaff's assertion that the ad was intended to be playful and humorous, we considered that a light-hearted tone was insufficient to mitigate the potential for offence due to the sexual nature of the content. We noted that the ad was available to view to all visitors to Giffgaff's Twitter feed, the general content of which appeared to be of a mild nature that would have general appeal to consumers, and would play whether or not they were signed in to Twitter or the site hosting the video itself. We therefore considered that the ad was untargeted. We acknowledged that a warning message was displayed at the beginning of the video, but noted that it was initially obscured by the video's control panel, was discreetly positioned and was only present briefly. We also considered that the phrase WARNING: You cannot unsee this was unlikely to indicate to viewers the nature of the scene that was to follow and, therefore, was inadequate to alert viewers to the content of the video. Moreover, we considered that the untargeted nature of the medium meant that a disclaimer was not sufficient to prevent the ad from being seen by viewers who would be offended by the content. Because the video featured strongly sexual content in an untargeted medium we concluded that it was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Giffgaff Ltd to ensure that future ads in untargeted media did not contain strongly sexual content.

A TV ad, a VOD ad and a video seen on the Toyota UK YouTube channel promoted the Toyota Yaris Hybrid.

The ad showed a number of different drivers and passengers singing and dancing along to Locked Out of Heaven by Bruno Mars whilst driving around urban, and often narrow, roads. The ad included shots of the drivers gesturing with their arms, and at one point a female driver appeared to have her eyes closed as she sang along. Half way through the ad on-screen text stated THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DRIVING AND DRIVING HAPPY and near the end a voice-over stated, Fall in love with driving again with the New Yaris Hybrid ... .

75 viewers challenged whether ad was irresponsible as it encouraged dangerous driving.

ASA Assessment: Complaints upheld

The ASA considered that while other road users and pedestrians were at a minimum, viewers would believe that the ad was set on real urban roads and reflected real-life driving conditions. We noted that a number of the scenes showed both drivers and passengers listening and singing along to music, while moving and dancing in their seats, and that in a few scenes the driver was shown gesticulating with one arm off the wheel or briefly looking away from the road to interact with a passenger. While we did not consider that to show drivers and passengers enjoying and moving around to music in a car was necessarily irresponsible, we had concerns that some of the drivers were not shown paying due attention to the road, and instead appeared to be easily distracted by their passengers and the music. In particular, we were concerned that most viewers would believe that the woman in the final scene of the ad had her eyes briefly closed while singing along, and therefore was not concentrating on the road, or any obstacles that could appear at a moment's notice.

Because we considered that some of the featured drivers were not shown paying due attention to the road, we concluded that the ad condoned and encouraged dangerous driving and was therefore irresponsible.

The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told Toyota (GB) plc to ensure their ads did not depict dangerous driving in future.