1. ASA Research Task
http://www.asa.org.uk/
ASA stands for advertising standards authority. Its role is to "regulate the content of
advertisements, sales promotions and direct marketing in the UK" by investigating
"complaints made about ads, sales promotions or direct marketing", and deciding whether
such advertising complies with its advertising standards codes. These codes stipulate that
"before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers
must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are
capable of objective substantiation" and that "no marketing communication should mislead,
or be likely to mislead, by inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, omission or otherwise".
The ASA protect children by making sure that the adverts targeted at or likely to be seen by
then are appropriate and do not cause harm to children. The advertising rules surrounding
children are deliberately strict. This is because children are generally more credulous and lack
the experience of adults to engage, critically assess and cope with commercial images and
messages.
The ASA will not hesitate to ban any advert that could result in a child’s physical, mental or
moral harm. Fortunately, the majority of advertisers are committed to preparing ads in a
socially responsible way and working with us to get their ads right.
‘ASA’ stands for Advertising Standards Authority and the company/organisation is
responsible for the content of adverts and make sure that the adverts are no misleading,
harmful or offensive. There are 5 key principles advertising codes:
Understanding: This also can act purposefully and be fair and balanced
Support: They would also support the advertisers so they can help create responsible adverts.
The company would increase their information so that every business would have access to
the support it needs.
Impact: The Company would make sure that they will spend time on matters which would
affect a lot of the consumers.
Proactive: The Company will work with others and tackle problems in the adverts so the
consumers are happy.
Awareness: The Company would make sure that the public will know who they are and know
what they do. It would also give the public the confidence in the ‘ASA’ work.
2. Case Study 1
The date is the 2nd June 2010 and the company is called ‘Department of Health’. There was 2
complaints made about this advert from this company. The centre of the complaint
challenged the claim that woman would be three times more likely to get mouth cancer. The
advert shows two woman at home sharing a bottle of wine. One of the women on screen
shows her internal organs and skeleton to show the damage that happens when you consume
a large glass on wine more than once a day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2a5ICC0Iw0
The main issues of the complaints were that the advert had been misleading and had said that
you are three times more likely to get mouth cancer. They had used imagery such as the
woman’s skeleton and lungs showing to show the internal damage you would get by
drinking. It would also show that you get a lot of internal damage you do not notice. The
advert also exaggerates the risks of alcohol consumption with the imagery as it shows that
you are three times as likely to get a stroke as they show the woman’s brain as the damage
starts developing.
BCAP TV Code
5.1.15.2.1
ASA had acknowledged the references made by Department of Health which considered the
risks of alcohol consumptions. The ASA had also noted that the National Institute of Clinical
Excellence stated that alcohol consumption is an important risk factor for cancers of the
mouth. It would become a greater risk with tobacco and a lot more alcohol consumption.
Clearcast considered the claims about the risks associated with drinking alcohol was
exaggerated in the advert. Therefore Clearcast sent their medical consultant who confirmed
that the claims were not false or misleading.
ASA acknowledged the complaints and the advert was investigated under the standard TV
broadcasting codes for misleading adverts however nothing was seen as a breach. Therefore
no other action was necessary.
Case Study 2
3. The date was 17th it was a TV advert for a skin cream opened with the on-screen text
"Inspired by the science of genes". A male voice-over stated "Inspired by the science of
genes, L'Oreal unlocks Youth Code. Discover our first cream enriched with patented pro-gen
technology". A shot of the product was shown. The voice-over continued "Youth Code also
re-awakens skin's youthfulness". On-screen text stated "Over 70% of 229 women agree ...”
There were four complaints from viewers challenging whether the claim "Inspired by the
science of genes" was misleading because it implied the product had a basis in genetic
science.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx1COjexRJc
BCAP TV Code
5.1.2
Response
L'Oreal said the ad was inspired by research and discoveries they made in relation to skins
behaviour. They sent a summary of that research. The research involved identifying which
genes were responsible for the renewal and repair of the skin surface and how it was affected
by age. They discovered that the response of those genes in relation to external stresses such
as exfoliation at the skin surface, sun exposure or irritation slowed down in older skin
compared to younger skin, and the skin's ability to respond quickly and renew cells was a key
indicator of skin condition. They said they had then incorporated ingredients into their cream
that took that into account to help improve the skin's condition. Clearcast said they had
received evidence from L’Oreal that they had conducted extensive research which led to the
development of the product Youth Code. Clearcasts cosmetics consultant noted that the
product contained the ingredient Bifid bacteria (Pro-Gen technology), which was selected for
Youth Code due to its demonstrated positive effect on the expression of the KRT6b gene
(Keratin Gene). The consultant therefore agreed that the general claim, "inspired by the
science of genes" had been substantiated due to the research and discoveries that preceded
and shaped the development of the final product Youth Code.
Assessment
Not upheld
4. The ASA noted Clearcasts assertion that the claim "Inspired by the science of genes" referred
to the research L’Oreal had undertaken in that field, and not the claim that the product re-
awakened skins youthfulness. In the context of an ad for a face cream, we did not consider
viewers would understand the claim "Inspired by the science of genes" to mean the benefits
claimed for the product had a proven basis in genetic science, but rather that L’Oreal had
incorporated ingredients into the cream to help improve the skin's condition. We accepted the
evidence showed they had assessed how the response of the genes responsible for the renewal
and repair of the skin surface slowed down with age, and had included ingredients in the
cream with moisturising properties in response to that. We concluded the claim "inspired by
the science of genes" was therefore not misleading in the context of the ad.
