New Decisions: Influencer ad identification, Rolla jeans outdoor ad removed, and more
The following decisions have been released to the ASA website:
- Complaint 20/088 Threebyone, Rolla Jeans, Out of Home, Settled in part, Not Upheld in part
- Complaint 20/182 NZME, Website, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/197 Webwonks, Radio, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/207 Arnotts New Zealand, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/225 New Zealand Seniors, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/228 Griffins Food Company, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/229 Maureen Pugh, Facebook and Twitter, Decline to Adjudicate
- Complaint 20/239 Asahi Beverages, Boundary Rd, Out of Home, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/094 Department of Conservation and Waikato Regional Council, Print, Not Upheld
- Complaint 20/211 GJ Gardner, Television, Settled
- Complaint 20/217 Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, Facebook, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/230 Tristar Products, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/233 Voice for Life, Billboard, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/177 Department of Internal Affairs, Keep it Real Online, Television, Not Upheld
- Complaint 20/216 Valley Education and Training Enterprises, Print, Settled
- Complaint 20/222 50 Shades of Green, Out of Home, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/238 Vodafone, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/241 Department of Internal Affairs, Keep it Real Online, Television, Settled
- Complaint 20/246 DB Breweries, Instagram, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/220 Dominos Pizza, Digital Marketing, Not Upheld
- Complaint 20/231 Erin Simpson, Caci Clinic, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 20/248 Family First, Print, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/249 Brand Developers, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/250 New Conservative, Digital Marketing, Decline to Adjudicate
- Complaint 20/253 Colgate Palmolive, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 20/256 Dunedin City Council, Digital Marketing, Settled
- Complaint 20/108 Avril Carpenter, Digital Marketing, Settled
- Complaint 20/136 Bodywise Natural Health and Beauty, Digital Marketing, Settled
- Complaint 20/245 Hallenstein Glassons, Digital Marketing, Settled
Rolla Jeans outdoor advertisement removed
The large Rolla Jeans poster advertisement outside a dairy included imagery of a topless woman wearing jeans. The woman was covering her breasts with her hands. The text “Rolla’s” and “Sofia Ritchie” was written across the photo.
The Complainant was concerned the advertisement depicting a topless woman was located within 20m of a primary school.
The Complaints Board found the advertisement itself did not reach the threshold to be regarded as offensive, noting while there was a degree of sexuality, it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence as it depicted a fashion model in a way that was not exploitative or degrading.
The majority of the Complaints Board agreed to settle the complaint, noting the advertisement had been proactively removed and the media company had committed not to place the advertisement in that location in the future. The Complaints Board ruled the complaint was Not Upheld in Part and Settled in Part.
Influencer withdraws content not labelled as an ad
Erin Simpson’s Instagram advertisement promotes the Caci Clinic’s micro needling treatment through an Instagram story on her personal Instagram account. The post shows a picture of Erin’s face with text saying “My face will only be red for about an hour and then will go down! The benefits of this treatment will last months”. The post continues by saying “@caci_nz have different programmes and deals you can sign up to, to save your pennies. Click through or ring for a consult like I did”.
The Complainant was concerned the advertising content posted did not adequately acknowledge that the promoted Caci Clinic service was paid or gifted.
The Chair noted the Complainant’s concerns the advertisement did not contain sufficient identification to indicate it was advertising. The Chair acknowledged the Influencer’s self-regulatory action in removing the advertisement and ruled the complaint was Settled.