|
|
|
 |
GREAT BRITAIN |
|
|
|
 |
 |
Adjudication of the Advertising Standards Authority:
Complaint:
Objections to an advertisement in the Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily Telegraph, Times, Independent, Guardian and Observer, headed "Killer Heels by N M A". The advertisement featured a large black stiletto-heeled shoe; impaled on the metal heel was the body of a man; the heel was in a pool of blood. The complainants objected that, because the advertisement condoned and trivialised violence, especially against men, it was offensive and sexist and unsuitable for use.
Adjudication:
Complaints upheld
The advertisers said the purpose of the campaign was to demonstrate that national newspapers were an effective medium to build brands, particularly to a female target audience. They explained that they had advertised fictional brands in product categories that underutilised press advertising and had devised advertisements for those brands to elicit an emotional response; the "Killer Heels" advertisement was for the fashion category. The advertisers said the advertisement was a visual pun on the expression "Killer Heels" and was highly original to make it stand out from other fashion advertisements. They maintained that, to avoid causing offence, they had made the advertisement like a cartoon by showing a heel that was out of proportion to the size of the man and was unrealistically ''spearing'' the man; they had also, deliberately, not shown blood on the man. The advertisers claimed that, because the image was removed from reality and in a fashion context, it would not be seen to condone or encourage violence or homicide. In addition, they asserted that the image did not exceed the standards acceptable in the fashion industry. The advertisers said the advertisement was not a call to arms to women to get the upper hand on men and did not demean men or say women were superior to men.
The Daily Express, Daily Telegraph, Times, Guardian and Observer all said the cartoon style of the image made it so far removed from reality that it would not be seen to condone violence; they believed it was not sexist and did not trivialise violence against men. The Daily Express had received two complaints about the advertisement and the Daily Telegraph had had one non-specific complaint. The Daily Mail had received several complaints by telephone; they said, with hindsight, the advertisement was not suitable for their publication and they would not reuse it. The Independent did not comment.
The Authority considered that, although it featured an obviously unrealistic image, the advertisement trivialised and stylised violence and, because of that, was likely to cause widespread and serious offence to readers. It told the advertisers not to repeat the approach.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
