A SOCIAL MEDIA advertisement for Conor McGregor’s Forged Irish Stout brand is among 18 adverts found to be in breach of the advertising standards.
Of the 21 recent complaints made to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), 17 were upheld in full and one was upheld in part.
One of the complaints centred around an Instagram reel posted on the Forged Irish Stout page.
It depicted a group of female models wearing a cropped top and high-leg hotpants, while posing around a vehicle and drinking pints of Forged Stout.
At various points, the models also posed around a person dressed as a life-sized model of a Forged Stout can, before eventually following it off screen.
The complainant said the ad contained “sexualised content which made a link between alcohol and improved sexual relations or performance” and that the advertisement was likely to breach the Code.
The ASA ordered that the advert not reappear in that manner, and Forged Irish Stout removed the advert from its Instagram account upon receipt of the complaint.
The ASA’s complaints committee noted there was “significant emphasis on the female models’ cleavages and bottoms, in some cases solely on these areas”.
It was deemed that there was no “creative reason for this other than to objectify the female models”.
The Committee also deemed that the manner in which the female models were “posed or shown interacting with the person dressed as the life-sized version of the product was sexually suggestive”.
The ASA deemed this to be an “irresponsible manner in which to depict women” and that the Instagram account did not consider “public sensitivities regarding coarseness and sexual innuendo”, resulting in it breaching the code.
The ASA also upheld a complaint against Eir of misleading through an online and direct mail advert.
Both adverts featured a series of prices for 12 and 24 month contracts and beneath, it was stated that the monthly price of the plans would increase from April of each year in line with the Consumer Price Index, plus an additional 3% increase.
Three complaints were received in relation to this, with the complainants remarking that the monthly prices advertised were misleading due to the fact that the prices were adjusted in April of each year.
The complainants therefore considered it was not possible to pay the quoted price each month for the full 12- or 24-month contract as advertised.
In response, Eir said it is “very open with customers regarding price” and that the adverts “never communicated that these were ‘fixed price points’”.
The ASA complaints committee noted that while Eir had illustrated there would be a price increase through footnotes and hyperlinks, “these caveats fundamentally contradicted the stated offer”.
“The advertising stated that the price was a per month price for 12 or 24 months, when in fact the price would be increasing, and therefore was not valid for the full 12 or 24 months of the contract,” said the ASA.
The advert was therefore deemed to be misleading and must not appear again in that format.
A complaint of misleading was also upheld against The AA Ireland.
An advert on its website in relation to windscreen cover stated: “We provide unlimited* windscreen cover, where we will pay the cost of replacing or repairing broken or damaged windscreens and windows.”
The asterisk noted: “*Limited to €225 where the claim is not processed through the AAI approved repairer.”
A complainant said this was misleading because windscreen cover would not be provided for any more than two claims.
The AA Ireland said the “intended context of the word ‘unlimited’ was that the cost of cover they would pay in the event of a claim for windscreen cover was unlimited” – though subject to a limit of €225 where the claim was not processed through an approved repairer, as noted in the advert.
The AA Ireland said the complainant had mistakenly interpreted the word “unlimited” as referring to the number of claims that could be submitted for windscreen cover, which was not the case.
The ASA said “consumers would understand the term ‘unlimited’ to be an absolute claim” and as there were indeed limits on the number of claims that could be made, it was concluded that this was likely to mislead.
The ASA concluded that the advert should not appear in the same format and reminded advertisers that it was not appropriate to use the term “unlimited” in marketing communications if limitations applied to an offer.
While the asterisked information remains the same, The AA Ireland has since amended the wording of the advert to read that a “claim for windscreen cover is provided for an unlimited* cost”.
Other upheld complaints included one against Leinster Senior College for stating students will “learn from Ireland’s best teachers” – the ASA said “no evidence had been provided to substantiate the claim” and the advert was withdrawn.
A complaint was also upheld against Jesters Casinos which depicted Santa Claus at a slot machine – the ASA said the advert could be “deemed to be targeted towards children”.
A MoveHome.ie advert which claims a property for sale in the Glasnevin area of Dublin was a 28-minute walk from Dublin City Centre was also deemed misleading since it was a 50-minute walk from the Spire on O’Connell Street.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say