Advertising Standards Bureau Review of Operations 2014 | Page 38

clearly implied that the woman was screaming
because her child was drowning and that the
advertisement depicted a level of disproportionate
violence and was likely to cause alarm and distress
to some members of the community, especially
children.
Representations of nerve pain using images of
needles and nails in a hand (Pfizer Australia
– 0243/14) were presented in a clinical and
unrealistic manner and would not cause distress in
viewers, including children. Although given a W
rating (enabling the advertisement to be shown
in children’s viewing times) the Board view was
that the advertisement’s very serious tone and
unrealistic images were not scary and unlikely to
cause distress.

A scene in which a seagull is mistaken for a
volleyball (Specsavers Pty Ltd – 0534/14) was
viewed by the Board as one which would not
be considered to condone or encourage violence
against seagulls. Noting that the theme of the
advertisement was in keeping with the advertiser’s
previous advertisements where people make errors
because they are not wearing appropriate visual
aids, the Board agreed it was a situation most
likely to be considered unlikely and humorous.
The Board also noted most members of the
community would recognise that the seagull was
not a real bird but a computer generated image
and that the bird was seen unharmed at the end of
the advertisement.

Bullying

An image of a skeleton like hand dragging its
fingernails through the name of the game on the
floor of a mall and similar imagery on the side
and rear panels of buses (Bethesda - 451/14 and
452/14) were viewed by the Board as relevant to
the product being advertised and not as images
which portrayed violence that was inappropriate
given that the advertised product was a
horror game.

Behaviour which may be considered bullying is
considered by the Board under Section 2.3 for
violent acts or Section 2.6 (health and safety) for
non-violent bullying.

Cruelty to animals

Advertisements with the potential of causing
alarm and distress to children were considered by
the Board in 2014.

Concern for the welfare of animals continued
in 2014 with the Board considering several
advertisements under Section 2.3 for cruelty
towards animals.
Complaints were dismissed after concerns were
raised about dog welfare in an advertisement for
a dog treat (Mars Petcare Australia - 0168/14)
and for cat welfare in a gambling advertisement
(Tabcorp – 0324/14). In both advertisements the
Board viewed the attention given to either animal
was not cruel—the cat received affectionate
petting and the animated dog received a treat.
The Board acknowledged that cruelty to animals
is a serious topic but was of the view that an
image of a pigeon in a bottle ( JCDecaux Australia
Pty Ltd – 0418/14 was clearly in the context
of a campaign highlighting communication
methods and that it would be very unlikely to
encourage people to try and copy the image with
a live pigeon.

36

In 2014 the Board did not find any cases to
breach Section 2.3 in relation to violent bullying.

Imagery attractive to children

Behaviour depicted in advertisements for a toy
sale (Woolworths Supermarkets - 0263/14 and
0274/14) that might be copied by children was
thought to be overly aggressive by some viewers.
The Board agreed that the suggestion of blowing
something up is of a mildly violent nature.
However in the context of children posing as
agents or villains, the Board view was that in
connection with the promotion of a toy sale, the
overall impression the children’s behaviour gave
was one of fantasy and not one of strong violence
or the promotion of violence.

Advertising Standards Bureau