New Decisions: Toyota ad did not breach Code, Instant Finance ad amended, and more
The following decisions have been released to the ASA website:
- Complaint 21/099 Lotto NZ, Email, Not Upheld
- Complaint 21/124 Oliva Scott, Website, Settled
- Complaint 21/127 Spark NZ, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/096 The NZ Herald, Print, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/098 Flare Fires, Digital Marketing, Settled
- Complaint 21/104 @nicoleandhergirls, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/130 Spark NZ, Skinny, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/133 Bendon NZ, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/017 Harvey Norman, Television, Not Upheld
- Complaint 21/051 Eternity Media Productions, The Incredible Journey, Television, Upheld
- Complaint 21/085 Kellogg NZ, Coco Pops, Television, Settled
- Complaint 21/094 Instant Finance NZ, Television, Settled
- Complaint 21/097 Toyota New Zealand, Lexus, Television, Not Upheld
- Complaint 21/102 @ashowens, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/107 @viarnibright, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/110 Southern Clearance Centre, Print, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/112 @hannahmellsop, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/106 @iamsoph, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/108 @mybalanceproject, Instagram, No Jurisdiction
- Complaint 21/113 @Mattandnattravelthat, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/114 @thestyleinsider, Instagram, Settled
- Complaint 21/128 Mothers Matter, Television, Digital Marketing, Upheld in part
- Complaint 21/081 Pure South New Zealand, Facebook, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/115 Radius Care, Digital Marketing, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/116 Reckitt Benckiser Finish Powerball, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/129 Christchurch Casino, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/132 Barfoot & Thompson, Out of Home, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 21/137 ifurniture, Facebook, Settled
- Complaint 21/143 Delta Mike Ltd, Digital Marketing, No Grounds to Proceed
Instant Finance TV ad amended to remove hitting scene
The Instant Finance television advertisement features a couple packing a donkey and cart for a trip away. The couple begin to argue with the woman raising her voice and hitting the man with her handbag.
Three Complainants were concerned the advertisement showed a level of violence which would not be acceptable if the genders were reversed.
The Chair accepted the complaints to go before the Complaints Board to consider whether the Advertising Standards Code and Code for Financial Advertising had been breached. Upon receiving the complaints, the Advertiser amended all versions of the advertisement to remove the scene depicting the woman hitting the man with her handbag.
Given the Advertiser’s co-operative engagement with the process and the self-regulatory action of amending the advertisement, the Chair ruled that the matter was Settled.
Toyota ad depicting Lexus on racetrack did not breach Code
The Toyota New Zealand television advertisement promoting the Lexus IS depicts a winding racetrack before showing the Lexus car being driven around the road. The voiceover says “We don’t just create cars, we create goosebumps. We don’t just make an RPM, but BPM and it doesn’t just grip the road, it grips you too.” The advertisement ends with voiceover saying, “Performance which goes beyond necessary.” The text says “#BEYONDNECESSARY”. The advertisement contains a super which says “Overseas model shown.”
The Complainant was concerned the advertisement showed a car exceeding the speed limit and implied it was OK to break the law.
The Complaints Board considered the complaint, noting the advertisement was promoting the high-performance qualities of the car rather than condoning excessive speed. The Complaints Board said the advertisement could have been clearer by informing the consumer it was filmed in a controlled environment, but the majority agreed there was sufficient imagery in the advertisement to show the vehicle was being driven on a racetrack rather than a public road. In accordance with the majority, the Complaints Board ruled the complaint Not Upheld.