Advertising Standards Bureau Review of Operations 2014 | Page 37

The Board took a different view of an
advertisement in which a woman slaps a man on
the back of the head (Camel Tanks – 0491/14).
In upholding complaints about the advertisement
the Board noted the sound of a man being hit
and his expression of pain. The Board was of the
view that the sound effects were realistic and were
not humorous and nor could they be considered
a slap‑ stick depiction of violence. Overall the
Board view was that slapping someone in response
to such insignificant behaviour was not relevant to
the product or service advertised.

Humour and depictions of pain
Advertisers should take care or reconsider using
violence in advertisements if violence is not
directly related to their product or service. Section
2.3 of the Code states that violence should not be
presented unless it is justifiable in the context of
the product or service advertised. Advertisements
will sometimes use humor to minimise the impact
of violence in advertising, and this is taken into
account by the Board.
Complaints were dismissed about a television
advertisement featuring a scene where a man
is hit from the side by a giant boxing glove
(Horticulture Australia Ltd - 0122/14). The Board
view was that the overall tone was slapstick and
that the use of the boxing glove was to emphasise
the ‘sugar hit’ gained from eating a donut rather
than a depiction of actual violence.
In the Board’s view being hit by a snowball while
having a drink in a bar (Beam Suntory – 0184/14)
was an unreal situation and also one which does
not depict, condone or encourage alcohol fuelled
violence or violence of any kind. The Board agreed
the woman in the advertisement appeared to
welcome the snowball, and determined that the
snowball was a metaphor for the flavour of the
beverage, and not an actual depiction of violence.

Relevance to the product or service
The provisions of the Code are specific in
that violence can be portrayed only where it
is justifiable in the context of the product or
service advertised. An advertisement which
depicted a person being held captive with a bag
covering their head (Oporto Franchising Pty

Review of Operations 2014

Ltd - 0072/14) was found to breach Section 2.3.
The Board noted that the act of keeping someone
captive and covering their face could be perceived
by viewers as the ritualised beginnings of the
torturing of the captured man and that these
actions are both menacing and violent. The Board
noted that the advertisement is for a restaurant
and its new line of steak burgers and although
the advertisement was likely to be viewed by
an older audience, the portrayal of violence was
not justified in the context of selling a burger.
The Board view was that the advertisement had
a strong suggestion of menace and presented
violence in an unacceptable manner.
Concerns were raised about the violence depicted
in images used by a coffee company (Fresh
One - 0213/14) in the form of posts on the
Facebook page of the advertiser. The Board upheld
complaints against each of the six posts finding
them to breach the Code in relation to Sections
2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. One image was of a man
about to be decapitated by a masked executioner.
The Board view was that the man with his head
on the wooden block looks distressed and the
hovering executioner with a raised axe presents
a sense of menace and violence which is not
appropriate in the context of the advertised
product regardless of the accompanying text.
In the Board’s view the use of a domestic violence
situation to depict the dangers faced by police
(QLD Police Union of Employees – 0462/14)
was not suggesting that all men are violent
towards women. The Board view was that the
scenario depicted was suggestive of violence but
was relevant to the overall message and although
weapons were shown, was not in breach of Section
2.3 of the Code.

Movies and games
Outdoor advertisements promoting video games,
one featuring a central figure holding a large gun
figure using a headless man (Bethesda – 0188/14),
and the other with a man holding mobile phone
in one hand and a gun in the other (Ubisoft
P/L - 0226/14) were dismissed by the Board in
2014. In these cases, the Board view was that the
images in the advertisements were relevant to the
products being advertised and that the depiction
of characters from the game was not a depiction

that portrayed violence that was unjustifiable in
the context of the product being sold.

Weaponry
Advertisements using images of weapons are
considered under Section 2.3 of the Code. In
2014 the Board dismissed complaints where
a radio advertisement featured the sound of a
person falling with a thud to the ground after the
sound of gunfire (Epworth Healthcare - 0229/14)
and a television advertisement in which former
cricket player Shane Warne is being fired at
with paint balls from close range (Sportingbet
Australia Pty Ltd – 0098/14).
In the case of the radio advertisement the Board
noted that the advertised product is a health check
and considered that the suggestion made in the
advertisement that people are not bullet-proof
is not inappropriate in the context of health
checks although noting th at there is increasing
community concern surrounding gun crime.
The Board’s view was that in this instance the
advertisement is using a common metaphor, along
with sound effects, in relation to health awareness
which in the Board’s view was justifiable in the
context of the advertised product.
The Board noted the weapons used in the
television advertisement were clearly paint ball
guns and not real guns and that while Shane
Warne did not enjoy the experience it was made
clear that he had volunteered to be hit with
paintballs as part of a bet and the consequence of
this decision were clearly shown.

Graphic depictions
While the Board is more lenient on graphic
depictions in relation to community awareness
message, it is not as lenient when the
advertisement is for a specific product (EBBS
International - 0279/14). This advertisement
from a commercial company for a life-saving
product was screened in children’s viewing time.
It featured statistics on the number of children
who drown each year and viewers heard a splash
as someone enters water followed by a woman
screaming loudly with text on screen reading
“Don’t let your child become another drowning
statistic”. In the Board’s view the advertisement

35