| Bulletin | 09/6 |
| Batch No. | 189 |
| Ref | 12156 |
| Product | Health & Beauty |
| Advertiser | Sara Lee - Brylcreem |
| Agency | |
| Medium | Electronic Media |
| Complaint Advertisement: The advertisement stated “The Brylcreem lexicon of rugby terminology. Maul v. to handle (somebody or something) roughly, usually considered to be a bad idea as plying them with drink tends to create a more agreeable result. Brylcreem ~ Effortless. Brylcreem styling since 1928.” Complaint: The complainant considered the advertising message as offensive and potentially dangerous. She considered that the advertisement appeared to encourage young men to get women drunk in order to take advantage of them and she said that if this was the case that she objected strongly to such a message. |
|
| 2006 Code | |
| 2002 Code |
|
| Response The advertisers explained that the advertisement was part of a series of six which used rugby terminology and which were also intended to complement a campaign which ran on TV, radio and outdoor over the previous three years. They said that various analogies had been used over the years to express the Brylcreem – Effortless message. As this was a sponsorship of the rugby section of the online newspaper, they said that they considered their approach appropriate. They said also that as Brylcreem was a brand targeted at younger male adults they were keen to entertain this audience in a relatively innocent, irreverent and exaggerated way. They said that while they appreciate the complainant’s concerns, they regretted if they had inadvertently caused offence. They said that the advertisement was not designed to be taken seriously. They ensured the Secretariat that the advertisement had concluded and that it would not run again. |
|
| Conclusion Complaint Upheld. The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaint and the advertisers’ response. The Complaints Committee noted the target audience and the placement of the advertising. They considered, however, that the overall message in the advertisement suggested that the consumption of alcohol could contribute towards sexual success. They also noted that the advertisement could be interpreted as encouraging unsafe and anti-social behaviour by means of immoderate drinking. Action Required: The Complaints Committee accepted the advertisers’ assurances that the campaign was over and that they would not run with the advertisement again. On that basis they did not consider any further action was required. |
|