Advertisment
The advertisement which was posted by an influencer on their Instagram account featured the Influencer standing by a fridge. He was bare chested and wearing shorts. The fridge door was open and the shelves inside the door were filled with bottles of different flavours of LeCoq Cocktails. The influencer was drinking one of the cocktails by the neck.
The text underneath the picture of the influencer was accompanied by various emojis and read as follows:
“TAKING A SIP FROM MY FIRST COQ*! ..
–
Well well well safe to say these Coqs are absolutely delightful – 6 different ready-made cocktails that are going to take summer by surprise this year !
–
Sold in a number of locations … (get them)!
–
-To celebrate Valentine’s Day I have a case (20+ bottles) of Coq to give one lucky follower to share!!
– *HOW TO WIN* .
– must be following (sic) @lecoqcocktails + myself
– tag the 3 friends you’d share a Coq with
– like this post + add it to your story for a bonus point
PS DON’T BE A DICK WHEN YOU’RE DRINKING YOUR LE COQ! PLEASE DRINK RESPONSIBLY (always)!
#LeCoq #(Influencer’s initials) #OhGod #Dublin #Competition AD”
Complaint
Issue 1
The complainant said that the influencer featured in the advertisement was under 25 and therefore should not have appeared in an advertisement promoting alcohol as a prize to a competition.
Issue 2
The complainant also considered that the post had used suggestive sexual content.
Issue 3
The complainant considered that the audience for the advertisement had not been vetted to ensure that it was over 18 years of age and that some of the influencer’s followers may be under 18.
Response
Issues 1, 2 and 3:
The distributors for the brand in Ireland responded to the complaint. They said that as soon as the complaint had been brought to their attention and given that they had been asked to remove the post immediately, they asked the influencer to remove the post in question.
They said that the influencer had confirmed back to them that the post had been taken down.
They advertisers and the influencer did not provide comments on any of the specifics of the complaint set out under Issues 1, 2 and 3.
Conclusion
Complaint Upheld
The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaint and the advertisers’ responses. They noted that the post had been removed immediately following a request from the ASAI Executive.
Issue 1 – Upheld:
The Committee noted the Code requirement that anyone appearing in an alcohol advertising should be over 25. They noted that no evidence or comment had been submitted in relation to the age of the individual in the advertisement. In the absence of comment, the Committee accepted the complainant’s contention that the individual concerned was under 25 and that therefore a breach of the Code had occurred under Section 9.7(a) of the Code.
Issue 2 – Upheld:
The Committee noted the sexual innuendo in the advertisement and considered that it was in breach of the Code requirement at 9.5(c).”
Issue 3 – Upheld:
The Committee noted that no evidence had been submitted that the post had been served to an 18+ audience. In the circumstances they considered that the post had breached Code Section 9.1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
As the post in question had been removed no further action was required in the matter.
The Complaints Committee told the advertisers to ensure that future advertising complied with the ASAI Code and pointed out that the ASAI Executive provided a copy advice service to help advertisers in the production of Code compliant advertising.
