Ads

To launch the high quality TV channel TNT in Belgium, they placed a big red push button on an average Flemish square of an average Flemish town. A sign with the text “Push to add drama” invited people to use the button…

State Insurance is set to launch one of the longest advertisements in New Zealand on Sunday night.

The 90-second ad will screen at 7.10pm this Sunday evening on TV One, TV2, TV3 and FOUR.

Characters on the ad will find themselves in a range of unfortunate situations involving car crashes and house fires, singing along to the 1980s track ‘Break My Stride’.

“It was one day of rehearsal and one day of shooting,” State Insurance head of marketing and communication Michael Pryor told the National Business review. Continue reading »

Even though I’m not interested in watching Wild Boys. I love the ad in the background on this site. It makes Throng look more slick instead of having the plain white background.

Along with their plans for a new public broadcaster, Labour has vowed to turn down the sound on TV advertisements should they find success at this year’s election.

The party’s broadcasting spokesperson Clare Curran has promised that the differing sound levels between ads and TV shows will be sorted under their government.

The issue has been raised for years over the increased sound levels for ads, with some up to 50 per cent louder than the actual TV show.

Curran says Labour would make it clear to broadcasters that they had to spend money on technology in order to fix the issue immediately.

If the issue was not sorted, they would introduce new regulations similar to the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act in the US.

“They may have made decisions to do what’s best for the viewers, rather than what’s best for the shareholders, and avoiding spending money … And we’re saying, sort it out,” Curran said.

Source: Herald

The Advertising Standards Authority has cleared an ad for the Rugby World Cup that depicts Mt Ruapehu as a giant party-popper after a complaint was submitted.

The ad shows a man and a woman on top of the mountain with the narrator saying: “One day soon, we will be hosting the biggest sporting event in our history, so ANZ bank would like to know: How would you welcome the world New Zealand?” 

The man answers “we’d make a giant party popper and fire it from Mt Ruapehu.” 

A party-popper is then launched from the crater lake. 

The complainant, a J. Milledge, argued that the ANZ ad was demeaning and disrespectful to show the mountain in such a way.

“This is a majestic mountain, a national treasure. I found the images of a massive part popper going off on its summit demeaning and disrespectful,” Milledge complained. 

“I write this as a secular, atheist, Pakeha. I can only imagine how Maori, particularly local iwi feel.” 

The ASA ruled that the scenario in the ad was portrayed in a “fantastical and hyperbolic way” and that it wouldn’t cause serious or widespread offense.

Source: Stuff 

The Advertising Standards Authority has released its annual report for 2010 and in it are the ten ads that riled New Zealanders the most.

A total of 1164 complaints were received regarding advertising in this country in all forms including TV, which again featured as the medium where most complaints were directed.

Below is the list of the ten most complained about advertisements for 2010 in all forms.

 

1. Erotica Expo Outdoor Advertisement

71 Complaints – Upheld

Fresh Fruit

A mobile billboard that advertised the erotica lifestyles expo was towed around the streets of central Auckland. The billboard contained an image of a woman’s naked pelvic area covered with a halved melon. The woman’s finger was positioned inside the melon. 

Complainants felt that the image, which simulated a woman with her fingers in her vagina, was indecent, offensive, discriminatory and “dehumanising” – reducing women to their genitalia. 

In the Complaints Board’s view, the public and highly visible campaign, was intended to cause maximum outrage and receive maximum exposure with the associated ripple effect of media and public attention. 

The Board said the advertisement not only offended against generally prevailing community standards, it was also unanimous in the view that the advertisement was degrading to women. 

 

2. ASB Bank Television Advertisement

39 Complaints – Not Upheld

No Ordinary Risk and Reward – Is it appropriate for a bank to loan money for IVF treatment?

This television advertisement depicted the story of a couple’s attempts to have a baby. The man sells his vintage car to fund a round of IVF treatment, which is also unsuccessful. The man applied for a loan with ASB to continue the IVF treatment which resulted in the woman giving birth to triplets. 

Complainants found the advertisement offensive for many reasons, among them that the television advertisement exploited a vulnerable group; was socially irresponsible; and promoting the accumulation of debt to start a family is not productive in an era that encourages saving. The majority of the Complaints Board found that the spirit and the intent of the advertisement was one of hope and renewed opportunity for people seeking another round of IVF treatment rather than one of exploitation, and like many financial matters, there was risk and reward and the advertisement had shown both unsuccessful and successful outcomes of IVF. 

The majority reiterated that the Advertiser was entitled to promote the possibility of financial assistance to fund IVF treatment to consumers and that the advertisement, despite the emotive elements involved, was not exploitative, nor misleading. 

 

3. Durex®

Bus & Billboard Advertisement

24 Complaints – Settled

The Condom Conundrum – Are Condom Advertisements Offensive?

The advertisement for Durex® condoms, which appeared on the back of buses and on billboards, featured a  naked man and a woman in an embrace.

Complainants were of the view that the advertisement was offensive and especially inappropriate in such a public forum where children could see it. 

The Advertiser said while it was not their intention to embarrass or offend anyone, they felt that informing consumers about Durex® condoms and condom usage encourages safe sex practices and therefore was a health benefit that served the public interest. 

However, in light of the complaints, the Advertiser agreed to remove the advertisement from the buses and billboards. 

 

4. Fresh-Up Television Advertisement

17 Complaints – Not Upheld

Bad Rub for Thirsty Masseur

The television advertisement portrayed a man being massaged by a male masseur. Because the masseur is thirsty, his lips stick to his gums, exposing his teeth and making him sound odd.

The masseur’s expression and the way he sounded made the man on the table uncomfortable and he looks around at the masseur who told the man: “You just try and relax, if you can”. At the end of the scene the words “Thirst is Creepy” were superimposed on the screen. Complainants thought the advertisement made a joke out of sexual harassment. 

The Complaints Board agreed that the massage scenario was uncomfortable to watch and was somewhat “creepy”. However, it also said that the focus on the masseur’s mouth was rather obscure and the message about him being thirsty was not immediately apparent. While the Complaints Board acknowledged that the advertisement presented a quirky incident in keeping with the “creepy” theme of the advertisement, it did not consider that it contained the sexual behaviour or implications suggested by the Complainants. 

 

5. Whittakers Television Advertisement 

16 Complaints  – Not Upheld 

Chocolate Lovers’ Naked Dip Doesn’t Cause Offence

The television advertisement showed a naked dark skinned male and a naked pale skinned female jumping into pools of chocolate and peppermint from rope swings. After they met at the side of the pools, the female runs her finger across the peppermint covered chest of the male and licks it. The male runs his finger across the chocolate covered cheek of the female and licks it. 

Complainants said that it was inappropriate to see two naked people in an advertisement when children were watching while others objected to the way the couple touched each other and raised issues relating to the timing of the advertisement as well as its suggestiveness and overtly sexual content. 

The Complaints Board said that the advertisement had been carefully created to ensure that any nude views had been fleeting and not gratuitous and it unanimously agreed the advertisement was not likely to cause serious and widespread offence. 

Addressing the concerns of the Complainants about the times the advertisement had played, the Complaints Board noted that the advertisement had been given a GXC rating which was defined as: “General Except Children”. The Board also agreed that the Advertiser had taken care to ensure the advertisement had been prepared with a due sense of social responsibility. 

 

6. Tui Website Advertisement

15 Complaints – Settled

Tui Settle Complaints About Website Advertisements 

The Tui website advertisement featured a woman standing dressed only in her lacy underpants. She had her arm covering her right breast and the viewer could see part of her breast. The text which read “DISTRACTING THE BOYS FROM THE TASK AT THE HAND SINCE 1889” featured at the bottom of the advertisement. 

Complainants objected that the advertisements were sexually provocative. 

Two other Tui website advertisements (10/620 and 10/621) that also featured scantily-dressed women drew 15 complaints each. The Advertiser, DB Breweries Limited, said that the user-generated copy appeared on the “live” website as a result of a computer error and that “live” access is not normally available for material deemed inappropriate. Once the Advertiser was made aware of the error, access to the images on the website was immediately blocked. All three complaints were settled, as of the advertisements had been removed. 

 

7. Burger King Television Advertisement

13 Complaints – Not Upheld

Vegetarians’ Beef With Burger King

Burger King promoted the “Rebel Burger” with images of the product on-screen and the voiceover which said: “The Rebel, from Burger King. Onion Rings, cheese, smoky barbeque sauce and a 100% chicken breast fillet. It’s so good, even the most dedicated vegetarian could turn.” 

Complainants thought that the advertisement belittled vegetarianism. They stated that they were vegetarian for ethical reasons, and were offended by the Advertiser’s implication that ‘committed vegetarians’ could be swayed by their product, and found the reference to vegetarians offensive, insulting and discriminatory. 

The Complaints Board noted the strong objections to the wording from the Complainants and their sincere concerns that their choice to be a vegetarian was being undermined and vegetarians overall were being insulted by such a statement. However, the Board noted the actual wording in the advertisement which said “It’s so good, even the most dedicated vegetarian could turn” and agreed that the advertisement had used a level of humour and satire to exaggerate the desirability of a food product, with a sense of the ridiculous. While recognising the advertisement had been offensive to the Complainants, the Complaints Board ruled that the advertisement was not reasonably likely to cause serious or widespread offence to vegetarians. 

 

8. DB Export Beer Television Advertisement

13 Complaints – Not Upheld  

Historical Context Saves Morton’s quote 

The television advertisement for DB Export Beer was about Finance Minister Sir Arnold Nordmeyer’s infamous ‘Black Budget’ and the introduction by Morton Coutts of DB Export Beer in response to the tax. The advertisement featured a screen-shot at the end of the advertisement with the text “LET NOTHING COME BETWEEN A MAN AND A GREAT BEER.” 

Complainants said that the advertisement had an “unduly masculine theme” and was thus in breach of the Code for Advertising Liquor. 

The Complaints Board accepted the Advertiser’s explanation that the story speaks of Morton’s vision to ensure great quality beer was affordable again to all New Zealanders It noted that the advertisement was about an era that was celebrating when drinking in a public bar closed at 6pm and as such, the advertisement was the Advertiser’s account of the events that took place at that time. 

The Board further acknowledged that beer had a predominate appeal to men and there was a level of acceptance that advertisements about beer would be more likely appeal to men rather than implying unduly masculine themes. 

 

9. Hampsta Radio Advertisement

12 Complaints – Upheld

Radio Jingle Jangles

The radio advertisement for Hampsta featured a child-like cartoon voice singing a jingle, which included encouraged listeners to join the Hampsta savings scheme. The jingle included the line: 

“But now my mum’s joined Hampsta cause it’s the smartest way to save a little bit each week to pay for Christmas Day. Now when we get to Christmas life won’t be a bitch. I get heaps of toys and food cause we’ll be Hampsta rich.” 

Complainants said they were shocked to hear the word “bitch” in the advertisement. 

The majority of the Complaints Board were of the view that the child-like voice and rhyming jingle style of the advertisement would have evident appeal to children who heard the advertisement and noted the concerns about the normalising of such expletives. The Board noted that the word “bitch” was in the 2009 survey “The Acceptability of Words on Television and Radio“ undertaken by the Broadcasting Standards Authority and that 26% of the people surveyed had found it offensive. The majority of the Complaints Board ruled that the advertisement did not observe a due sense of social responsibility 

 

10. Sanitarium Weetbix Television Advertisement

12 Complaints – Upheld

Challenges Around Controlled Conditions Filming

The television advertisement for Weet-bix showed a group of children snowboarding down the mountain and then long-boarding through fields and paddocks, then skate-boarding and biking on the open road and around a blind corner. 

Some of the children were on both sides of the road at various times. A safety message was featured at the bottom centre of the screen for part of the scene which read “Filmed on closed roads under controlled conditions”. 

Complainants were shocked and disturbed to see children skateboarding in the middle of a road on a bend and said the size of the warning on the screen that stated the scene was “filmed on a closed road under controlled conditions” was too small and unlikely to be noticed by a child or young person. 

The Complaints Board said that the depiction of the children skate-boarding on the open road was realistic, achievable by children, and showed an unsafe practice that children may try to re-enact. The Complaints Board was of the view that the safety message, even in light of the amended version, was insufficient given the realistic depiction of the scene and the risk of copy-cat behaviour by young viewers. Therefore, the Board was of the view that the advertisement had not been prepared with a high standard of social responsibility.

 

See the full report here.

A viewer has failed to get an ad pulled from TV after they lost their appetite due to its content.

The complainant, J Lester, went to the Advertising Standards Authority after they were put off their meal thanks to an ad that showed nits crawling on a boy’s head.

The ASA rejected the complaint, saying they found no grounds for the complaint to proceed.

The complainant argued that the ad was revolting and nobody wanted to see “crawly things” when they were eating.

The ad was for Para Plus Aerosol, a company that produces anti-head lice medication.

Source: Herald

Here’s a light-hearted skit our Prime Minister did last month to promote Napier with Australian comedian Peter Flaherty.

For all of you missing Paul Henry, this is for you!

And the behind the scenes video:

New guidelines have been set for advertising aimed at children on free-to-air television in New Zealand.

Broadcasters have agreed to the voluntary restrictions on when ads can be screened for children as well as restrictions on food advertising.

ThinkTV, a group that represents the major free-to-air networks in NZ, has updated its restrictions in the revised Getting it Right For Children booklet.

The Herald outlines the restrictions as including: 

- No advertising in pre-school television programming times;

- limited advertising in school-age children’s television programming times, with a maximum of 10 minutes per hour, plus two minutes of appropriately classified station promotions; and

- advertising must be clearly recognisable as such and not part of the editorial content of children’s programmes.

New rules have also been put in place for spin-off products, repetition, competition and sponsorship and ads for food and drink during children’s programming must be approved by a classification system before it can be screened.

However Green MP Sue Kedgley believes the voluntary restrictions favour the advertisers rather than the children.

“If the industry group was serious about protecting kids from advertising they would not allow advertising at all during school-age television programming times,” she said.

“The method used by ThinkTV to verify a particular food or beverage aimed at children allows the industry to ignore the expertise of health professionals.

“TV advertisements influence children’s food preferences and often encourage children to consume foods high in sugar and fat.”

Source: Herald