Advertising Standards
« Previous EntriesIn Jesus’ name, amen
Thursday, February 5th, 2009Someone complained to the Advertising Standards Authority that a Christmas ad from Bond and Bond was offensive to Christians. The ad said:
CELEBRATE THE BIRTH OF JESUS WITH SOME NEW GEAR, IT’S WHAT HE’D WANT
Offensive to Christians? Well… maybe some. But it’s mostly spoofing the brazen commercialisation of Christmas, including by Bond and Bond. Damn my […]
Right!
Monday, November 24th, 2008And here’s a political ad complaint I think the Advertising Standards Complaint Board got right. Again, it’s against ACT. This time, it’s against ACT’s claim that:
“Safe” New Zealand is now almost three times more violent than the US
As usual, the ASCB invited ACT to substantiate its claim. It seems from the decision that ACT, despite […]
Wrong again
Monday, November 24th, 2008I think the Advertising Standards Complaints Board has screwed up again, this time upholding a complaint about ACT’s political advertising. Norightturn made this point first.
The ads claimed that ACT was the only party opposed to the Emissions Trading Scheme. The Family Party complained that this was incorrect: it was opposed to the ETS, too.
A majority […]
Wrong
Friday, November 7th, 2008The Advertising Standards Complaints Appeal Board has upheld the decision against Labour’s YouTube ad - the one that criticised National’s plan to cut Kiwisaver in half. (The appeal board’s decision is below the complaints board’s one, so you’ll have to scroll down).
How bad is the decision? Let me count the ways.
First, it decided that the […]
Labour’s YouTube Boob 2
Thursday, October 30th, 2008I mentioned the Electoral Commission v Cameron case in the post below. The Court of Appeal granted judicial review against an Advertising Standards Authority decision upholding a complaint against the Electoral Commission.
One of the grounds of that decision was that the ASA shouldn’t have used its own complaints jurisdiction to trespass on the Electoral Commission’s […]
Labour’s YouTube Boob
Thursday, October 30th, 2008Did John Key say National would cut KiwiSaver in half? That’s what Labour said in their “John and John” ad. The ad was broadcast on TV and posted on YouTube.
One S Davies-Colley thought was misleading, and complained about it.
Under NZ’s increasingly creaky media law edifice, complaints about TV and radio election ads go to the Broadcasting Standards Authority. But […]
Dopey complaints
Tuesday, June 24th, 2008Pity the Advertising Standards Complaints Board. Get a load of these complaints, all from its latest summary of decisions:
The word “shitty” in a Burger Fuel poster was “offensive and socially irresponsible”.
A newspaper ad for Waikato draught beer with the tagline “for a hardcase thirst” was said to contain “an unduly masculine theme”.
A Land Transport NZ […]
Regulating broadcasting content
Monday, May 26th, 2008You may know that the government is having a big think about what to do about the patchwork of increasingly moth-eaten laws and regimes that govern broadcasting content.
It has produced discussion papers and invited feedback. The submissions are here.
More on this soon.
Ad strategy: attract complaints?
Wednesday, February 27th, 2008Surely Hell Pizza is trying to make its ads offensive so that it can attract extra publicity by having complaints against them upheld. How else to explain its direct mail ad that says:
Hell Spicy BBQ Pork Spare Ribs are by all accounts a lot like having sex with Jenny Shipley - messy but good.
I’m guessing Hell […]
“Confusing” is right
Friday, February 22nd, 2008Deborah Hill Cone opines that the Advertising Standards Complaints Board decision about the Charlies ad is “confusing”.
So’s her column.
She says the decision, upholding the complaint about the ad, is confusing because much more graphic non-cartoony stuff is shown on telly, such as Californication.
Then she says that the ads have commercial motives, and that this is a reason that they are […]