Latest Decisions: Greenwashing, stereotyping and more
27 March 2023
The following are the latest decisions from the ASA.
Settled Complaints: The advertiser has amended or removed the advertisement after receiving the complaint.
Complaint 23/028 – Clinicians via @casarahmarycooper, Instagram, Settled
Complaint 23/029 – Caltex, Radio, Settled
Complaint 23/030 – Brendan Foot Supersite, Facebook, Settled
Complaint 23/049 – Hello Fresh, Facebook & Instagram, Settled
Complaint 23/051 – Unilever Australia, On Demand Television, Settled
Complaint 23/058 – LDV, Great Lake Motor Distributors Limited, Facebook and Website, Settled
Complaint 23/059 – Easy Crypto Instagram, Settled
Upheld Complaints: The Complaints Board agreed with the complainant that the advertisement breached the Advertising Codes. The advertiser has been asked to remove or amend it.
Complaint 23/011 – Portage Cars Ltd, Facebook & YouTube, Upheld in Part, Not Upheld in Part
Complaint 23/012 – Department of Corrections, Live Television, Upheld
Complaint 23/019 – Department of Corrections, Live Television and OnDemand, Upheld
Not Upheld Complaints: The Complaints Board found the ad did not breach the Advertising Codes in relation to the complainant’s concerns.
Complaint 23/022 – Hell Pizza, Digital Marketing, Not Upheld
No Grounds to Proceed: The Chair of the Complaints Board reviewed the ad and the complaint, and ruled the issues raised are not a breach of the Advertising Codes.
Complaint 23/015 – Hell Pizza, Addressed Mail, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/025 – Dove, Unilever Australasia, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/026 – Asthetica, Out of Home, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/031 – Scholastic Book Club, Unaddressed Mail, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/033 – Toyota New Zealand, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/034 – Wrigley’s, Mars NZL Ltd, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/036 – Lotto NZ, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/037 – Burger King, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/040 – Kogan Mobile, Digital Marketing, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/041 – Genesis Energy, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/044 – Hilton Hotels, Digital Marketing, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/045 – Apple, Live Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/046 – St John / Hato Hone, Digital Marketing, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/055 – Countdown, On Demand Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/057 – Educators, TVNZ +, OnDemand Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Complaint 23/060 – Metlink, Facebook, No Grounds to Proceed
Decision Summaries
Each month we summarise two decisions from the above list
Corrections ads perpetuated harmful stereotypes
Complaint 23/012 – Department of Corrections, Live Television, Upheld
Complaint 23/019 – Department of Corrections, Live Television and OnDemand, Upheld
The Complaints Board ruled that two Department of Corrections advertisements perpetuated a negative stereotype and are not to be used again.
Four complaints were received across two Live Television and On Demand advertisements.
The first advertisement depicted a Pākehā Corrections Officer (Mike) and a Māori ex-prisoner (John) interacting during a chance meeting. A flashback depicts both Mike and John in scenes from John’s time in prison. The advertisement continues with both men explaining to John’s child how they ‘worked together’ and concludes with Mike saying, “Your Dad’s a good man, you’re a lucky kid”.
The second advertisement depicts a young Māori boy speaking directly to the camera while his father and a Corrections Officer can be seen talking in the background. The child says “I already knew Dad went to prison; Mum told me. And I know it’s all thanks to him that Dad’s got a good job now and so yeah, might become a Corrections Officer one day too”.
The complainants were concerned about negative stereotyping of Māori and Pacifica people as criminals, and said it portrayed the idea of a ‘white saviour’ and reinforced an unequal power dynamic.
The Advertiser defended the ads, stating the ads were part of a recruitment campaign containing nine television advertisements featuring a diverse range of ethnicities and genders. The Advertiser stated the campaign had undergone testing both internally and with a focus group, and casting had been undertaken with advice from a Māori cultural advisor.
The Board confirmed its long-held position that each advertisement must be assessed on its own merits as a stand-alone piece of communication. The Complaints Board acknowledged the challenging role the Department of Corrections and Corrections Officers fulfilled in society and noted the Advertiser’s justification that approximately 53% of the prison population is Māori to be a valid reason to cast a Māori actor to play the prisoner. However, the Board said the threshold for a harmful stereotype was triggered by casting a Pākehā man as the Corrections Officer and the portrayal of the power imbalance. The Board said this stereotype was not required to convey the Advertiser’s message about the merits of working in the Corrections field.
The Complaints Board ruled the complaints were Upheld, and the advertisements not to be used again in their current form.
Persil ad removed following greenwashing concerns
Complaint 23/051 – Unilever Australia, On Demand Television, Settled
Unilever has removed two Persil advertisements after receiving complaints they contained misleading environmental claims.
The 15 and 30 second digital marketing advertisements for Persil seen On Demand promotes their product as environmentally friendly. Scenes of deforestation, water pollution and forest fires are juxtaposed with those of children doing climate friendly activities. The voiceover includes the claim “we’re changing too, with 100% recyclable bottles”.
Two complainants were concerned the advertisement contained misleading environmental claims.
The Chair accepted these complaints to go before the Complaints Board to consider whether the Advertising Standards Code had been breached. Upon receipt of the complaints, the Advertiser removed the ads and committed not to use them again in their current form.
Acknowledging the self-regulatory action undertaken by the Advertiser, the Chair said it would serve no further purpose to place the matter before the Complaints Board, and ruled the complaints were Settled.
Please note:
Effective 20 March 2023, the ASA will cease issuing No Grounds to Proceed decisions. Where a complaint does not reach the threshold to breach the Advertising Standards Codes, a No Further Action notice will be issued. For more information, click here.
