ASA - Advertising Standards Authority

The following decisions have been released to the ASA website:

Complaint 20/416 Euro Liquor, Baltika 9, Facebook, Website, Settled
Complaint 20/611 Simone Anderson, Instagram, Upheld
Complaint 20/612 Simone Anderson, Instagram, Upheld
Complaint 21/004 CS & Co Beauty Solutions, Skyns, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/009 Harvey Norman, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/027 Animates, Instore, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 20/326 Appeal 20/021 Goodman Fielder, Meadow Fresh, Television, Upheld
Complaint 20/378 EcoFX Limited Consultation Pack, No Jurisdiction
Complaint 20/600 Vocus Group, Stuff Fibre, Digital Marketing, Settled
Complaint 20/604 New Zealand Government, COVID 19 Unstoppable Summer, Television, Not Upheld
Complaint 20/605 New Zealand Government, COVID 19 Unstoppable Summer, Television, Not Upheld
Complaint 21/002 Partners Life, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/011 Rug Doctor, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/014 Life Direct, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 20/025 Foodstuffs North Island, Pak N Save, Television, Not Upheld
Complaint 20/471 Toyota New Zealand, Television, Not Upheld
Complaint 20/551 Queenstown Lake View Holiday Park, Sign, Settled
Complaint 21/001 Nativa, Digital Marketing, Settled
Complaint 21/012 Energizer NZ Limited, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/013 Tourism New Zealand, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/021 Tierney and Fava Real Estate, Facebook, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 20/595 Smiths City, Television, Settled
Complaint 21/010 Coca Cola, Television, OnDemand, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/015 Skinny Mobile, Television, Settled
Complaint 21/020 Giannas Choice, Out of Home, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/023 Auckland City Council, Website, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 21/024 Tower Insurance, Radio, No Grounds to Proceed

Skinny Mobile TV ad withdrawn following complaints

The Skinny Television advertisement features a family discussing how they don’t pay for their internet connection and instead steal it from their neighbours. The advertisement shows the entire family wearing stockings over their heads to help support the narrative around burglary.

Six complainants were concerned the depiction of people with stockings over their heads, and the references to stealing, were irresponsible and in poor taste.

The Chair accepted the complaints to go before the Complaints Board and a response was requested from the Advertiser. The Chair confirmed the Advertiser had chosen to withdraw the ad following receipt of the complaints. The Chair said given the Advertiser’s self-regulatory action in removing the advertisement, the complaints were Settled.

Toyota Hilux TV ad did not breach Code

The television advertisement for Toyota New Zealand Limited features a number of Toyota Hilux vehicles gathering on a dirt road, which is situated in open countryside. The vehicles are shown being used for different purposes such as towing a boat or carrying fence posts or mountain bikes. In the final scene approximately 38 vehicles are shown leaving the meeting point, spreading out across the hillside, and dispersing in different directions. The text says: “THE POWERFUL NEW 2021 HILUX – AN UNBREAKABLE BOND”.

The Complainant was concerned the advertisement encouraged detrimental behaviour by showing four-wheel drive vehicles driving on public conservation land.

The Complaints Board noted that according to information provided by the Advertiser, the advertisement was filmed on private land, not public conservation land. The Board noted this would have been clearer if the location of the filming had been stated in the advertisement.

The Complaints Board said the advertisement used hyperbole to convey the idea that the Hilux is a popular vehicle which can be used for a wide range of purposes. The Board noted the final shot was achieved using video effects in postproduction. The Complaints Board said the advertisement did not depict or encourage environmental damage or degradation and ruled the complaint was Not Upheld.