Adidas sports bra ads banned in UK for objectifying women
Twitter and poster campaign featuring dozens of sets of breasts was harmful and offensive, says ASA
A slightly further point – we don’t after all, use dick pics to sell condoms….
Adidas sports bra ads banned in UK for objectifying women
Twitter and poster campaign featuring dozens of sets of breasts was harmful and offensive, says ASA
A slightly further point – we don’t after all, use dick pics to sell condoms….
Hello boys………Honourable mention too for ‘everyones favourite antipodean sex midget’ too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Wlsd5YzrmM
No one worries or even thinks about how a condom looks when it’s on. Women do want to get an idea of how a bra will look.
What Interested said!
So selling an item that fits very variable objects and is useful to said objects owners to make an informed choice in purchasing a functional item to restrain them, is a not okay. What sort of boobies are in charge?
Addolff,
Reminds me of Billy Connolly’s catherine wheel joke…
More research is needed
Interested, there have been many designs and colours over the years which were supposed to add to the ‘enjoyment’ (ladies mostly) and remember purchasing Durex ‘Black Shadow’ for some unfathomable reason……….
Sorry Roue, not a fan.
We noted the breasts were the main focus in the ads, and there was less emphasis on the bras themselves, which were only referred to in the accompanying text,” the ASA said. “As the ads contained explicit nudity, we considered that they required careful targeting to avoid causing offence to those who viewed them.”
I think the ASA have a point with this one.
“Only the balls should bounce.”
THAT was how to do a sports bra advert.
What if i want to buy/sell new tits?
“I think the ASA have a point with this one.”
I don’t think the ASA having a point is the point. The point is the ASA has no business existing at all.
God forbid that small children should see a woman’s naked breasts.
I think Adidas achieved their goal of loads of free media coverage
Looking at the state of the norks they used in the ad they were hardly unrealistic or aspirational. Certainly not titillating.
Rob Fisher
I actually largely agree with you there.
ASA is a classic example of Quango mission creep. There are certain thngs that need to be regulated with advertising, because otherwise the courts will become clogged up with lawsuits. It is easier to write to a body and ask them to look into a campaign or ad. You know “Legal, decent, honest” or whatever their motto was in the past.
One place where the ASA went off the rails was becoming involved in health issues. The campaign that really annoyed me was their bullying of Kelloggs et al into changing the recipes of their cereals. It didn’t bother Kelloggs because they just reprogrammed their mixing computer. But it bloody bothers me because Coco Pops now don’t taste of anything !
The woke war on women continues.
Seems like a deliberate attention grab or maybe cultural differences. They should just run a version ‘Censored by the Advertising Standards Agency’.
Add a strapline like: “Addidas. Ads too sexy for Britain. Bras just right for you.”
Very good point Rob Fisher, but not as good as Addolff’s link….
The ASA will only need rebranding work once it becomes the Morality Police under a future Caliphate.
Censorship is “harmful and offensive”. I don’t see the ASA banning censorship.
I recall talking to a friend who was a brand manager for an infant formula. He wanted to use a picture of a woman in a bra with the strap line “If it were any closer to natural milk we’d need to change the packaging” I don’t think the ASA would approve.
Well, it seems that incontinence pants, treatments for minge yeast and Cliff knows what else seem to be fine, but tits!
That said, given the horrific collection of freaks, land whales and failed genetic experiments that seem to constitute the representation of “beauty” in ads these days, the less seen the better!
Men too! In fact, please keep me abreast on how I can get in on that focus group.
I once overheard a graphic designer at an ad agency talking with a colleague. He said he used to have a medical imaging company as a client, and wanted to use one of their X-rays for the billboard/magazine ad. The tagline was supposed to be, “Doctors would kill for a body like this” but the idea got shot down. They were afraid that tagline appearing next to a skeleton would be triggering for women with eating disorders.
My younger sister ran for class treasurer in high school. She’s an animal lover, even wanted to become a veterinarian at one point and still maintains a pescatarian diet. So she used pictures of animals for her campaign posters, a giraffe wearing sunglasses, a panda riding a bike, a seal wearing a bikini…all saying “Vote for [insert name here]” in a speech bubble.
She went to the assistant principal’s office to get everything approved, where it was explained she couldn’t use one of her posters. It showed two chimpanzees wearing association soccer uniforms and a soccer ball, standing on a field. The rationale for the censorship was…and I shit you not…that it “could be offensive to our African-American students.”
So basically, majority of advertising decisions are made by complete mong bellends.