Ad Standards Wrap Up – July: Food Glorious Food
It’s time for our July Ad Standards Wrap Up, with a little bit of August peppered in for good measure (because when the decisions fit the theme, who are we to argue).
And this month, it’s all about food. Flavoured milk, pistachio spread and KitKats — with a healthy serving of naughty language, violence and questionable expressions on the side.
F OAK ’N COLD AS
First up, a billboard advertising flavoured milk featured wording which essentially read:
“F OAK ’N COLD AS”
A complaint was made in relation to the fairly obvious play on the F-word, seemingly spurred on by the complainant’s child working out the naughty language behind it all.
The complaint itself was dismissed in relatively boring fashion, with the panel finding that the wording was a light-hearted and humorous play on the F-word (rather than actually using it).
But that wasn’t the interesting bit.
What I found far more fascinating was that the advertisement was weather contingent. The image/phrase itself only appeared when the temperature dropped below a certain level (depending on the time of day).
Which lead me to wonder: was the panel as impressed as I was by this conditional advertising method or perhaps more importantly, can we simply justify swearing on exceptionally cold Winter mornings?
We’re all thinking it.
Hey Malaka!
Next up, another naughty language complaint — this time involving Pistachio Papi and the words “Hey Malaka” appearing on a sign inviting consumers to complete a survey about its pistachio spread.
The complainant stated that malaka translates to “wanker” or “jerk off” in Greek.
According to my Google translating efforts, we can add “asshole” into the mix too.
Again, the complaint was dismissed, with the Panel finding that the use of the term was not particularly aggressive or derogatory in the context of the advertisement.
And that could have been the end of Pistachio Papi’s involvement in this month’s Wrap Up.
It was not.
Pistachio Papi keeps Ad Standards busy
Pistachio Papi featured in three Ad Standards complaints across July and August (to date — who knows, there may be more).
Unfortunately for Pistachio Papi, the second two decisions weren’t as favourable.
The first involved an Instagram advertisement which gave the panel quite a bit to consider, including exploitative or degrading content, violence, language and health and safety concerns.
It managed something of a clean sweep — breaches across all of the relevant sections considered.
There is A LOT going on in this ad, but in short, it includes:
multiple F-bombs;
a woman being run over by a delivery truck;
a police barricade being trampled; and
a police officer being kicked to the ground.
The content description probably speaks for itself in terms of the panel’s decision here.
The second advertisement — which was also found in breach — included an image of a man and woman holding up their middle fingers alongside the wording:
“20% OFF WE’RE NOT F*ING AROUND!”**
This was found to be in breach on account of the language used.
What makes this decision particularly interesting is the comparison with the “F OAK ’N COLD AS” determination, especially given how close together date wise the two decisions were.
It’s also worth noting that the Pistachio Papi material was sent by email to individuals who had subscribed to receive its content and were therefore potentially more familiar with — and arguably less likely to be offended by — the brand’s cheeky advertising style.
Perhaps the following guidance from the panel helps distinguish the two. I’ll let you be the judge:
“The ‘f’ and ‘c’ words are generally viewed as harmful, unacceptable and not permitted. Nonverbal representations of the ‘f’ word are also generally not permitted. Words and acronyms that play on the ‘f’ word, e.g. WTF and LMFAO, but do not use the actual word are normally considered acceptable if used in a light hearted and humorous way, are in subtitle rather than spoken word and are appropriate to the situation...Advertising which sufficiently beeps or censors language so that it cannot be understood will not be seen to be strong or obscene language.”
So apparently there is a line. Exactly where that line sits between F OAK ’N COLD AS and WE’RE NOT F*ING AROUND** is perhaps a more interesting question.
Can you “raw dog” your commute?
Finally, Nestlé and KitKat would like to know whether you can “raw dog” your commute.
As you can probably guess, complaints were made on the basis of the sexual connotations associated with the expression “raw dog”.
Nestlé’s response was fabulously and justifiably: that’s not what it means anymore.
It pointed to the more recent use of “raw dogging” to describe doing something without the usual distractions or entertainment — particularly spending time without your phone.
In short, the panel agreed.
Kudos to Nestlé for what was a very comprehensive response to the complaint, including an entertaining selection of “raw dog” references for our viewing pleasure, demonstrating the expression’s increasingly mainstream, non-sexual use.
And with that, July (and just a little bit of August) gives us a useful reminder that context remains king when it comes to language in advertising.
You can imply the F-word. You can apparently call someone a malaka. You can even ask consumers to raw dog their commute.
But actual F-bombs and middle fingers?
Maybe keep those away from your pistachio spread.
Until next month.
