Hair ad banned
The Archdeacon of Liverpool and 22 others who complained about an “offensive” hairstyling TV commercial have been vindicated by the ASA.
The ads for the ghd IV hairstyling implement showed some scantily clad women looking upwards and saying internal prayers in various languages. The ads ended with the words “ghd IV The will be done”.
The Ven Ricky Panter said,
It crossed the line. The Lord’s Prayer is fundamentally important to many Christians. It should not be treated as trivial.
The ruling sends a message to advertisers they need to take people’s sensibilities into account. I’m glad the ASA has taken a stand on this.
Jemella, the company which produces the implements, argued that biblical phrases were in common usage in advertising, and that the ads were unlikely to cause widespread offense.
Apparently 23 complaints is widespread enough for the ASA, which concluded,
the eroticised images of the women apparently in prayer, in conjunction with religious symbols such as the votive candle and the rosary beads, the use of the phrase “thy will be done” from the Lords Prayer and the image of the letter t as the Cross of Jesus, were likely to cause serious offence, particularly to Christians.
and ruled that the ads must not be shown again.
Oh look. Here’s one:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ygK3KVHgJ0[/youtube]
Sad, but this door does swing two ways. While I agree that there should be no protection against offence in this manner, there still is some and we have to fight it.
The ASA doesn’t need more than one complaint if it (it being the folks down there with their books of rules) feels that offence has been caused or the code has been breached – and I suspect religious offence is in the code.
“…Lords Prayer and the image of the letter t as the Cross of Jesus, were likely to cause serious offence, particularly to Christians.”
Surely, only Christians though… I can’t think of anyone else who would give a fig?
Ven Ricky Panter?
Sounds like a medical complaint caused by inappropriate undergarments!
I really don’t see why this is offensive? If the ad said ‘Christianity is a load of old lies designed to make you feel better. Buy our shampoo’ I might see their point. If this gothic imagery is only allowed to be used by Christians then I know a few goths who are knackered.
@Mr Blackett. It’s not offensive to us: it’s offensive to people who hold them sacred. Goths probably offend the Stephen Greens of this world too. That’s the nature of these people and you’ll find it easier to make H from steps fancy girls than you will make these arseholes see sense.
The ads aren’t offensive to anyone. The only reason for the complaints is that the ASA is the only remaining avenue that these people have. No-one else will listen to their nonsense, but the ASA will roll over and this gives them the feeling that they can still control peoples lives in some way. It is all about control. Religion is the excuse.
Pah. I liked those ads. so 23 people found it offensive? If 24 people contact to say its inoffensive will the decision be reversed ?
jr has a point. But they probably are offended too.
@marc – You don’t see anyone banning Goths though. 23 people were offended enough to complain about this. Out of a population of over 60 million, I’d say they’re not significant enough to justify a ban.
Perhaps jesus prefers wash and go?
Millions of Muslims protesting against Mohammed cartoons: We stand firm in our values of freedom of speech, as we don’t let religion sway the unbiased values of our democracy.
23 christians complaining about some ad: Freedom of speech? What freedom of speech?
Ricky Panter could also do well to remeber other bits of scripture like. “You who is without sin cast the first stone”. My own personal gripe with Panter is that he quiet happily beleives eveything he is told by the media etc when it suits him. He is quiet abusive on the phone and refuses to explain exactly why. WOuldn’t want the truth getting in the way would you Ricky. I also thing he may be releated to a Contable Panter of Merseyside Police who is just as abusive.