Source: Advertising Standards Authority
The following decisions have been published:
- Complaint 18/102 Appeal 18/011 Medical Hypnosis, Brochure: Settled Appeal Dismissed
- Complaint 18/222 Ecostore, Digital Marketing: Settled – Advertisement changed
- Complaint 18/227 Gevir Products, Digital Marketing: Settled – Advertisement changed
- Complaint 18/259 QE Health, Digital Marketing: Upheld
- Complaint 18/295 Bridgestone Tyre Centre, Addressed Mail: Settled – Advertisement changed
- Complaint 18/299 Seafood NZ, Digital Marketing: Not Upheld
- Complaint 18/304 Linda Liewendahl, Digital Marketing: Withdrawn
- Complaint 18/308 Air New Zealand, Digital Marketing: Settled
- Complaint 18/309 Appeal 18/014 ANZ, Television, Not Upheld
- Complaint 18/311 C&R Communities, Out of Home: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/312 1 Cover, Television: Settled – Advertisement changed
- Complaint 18/319 Tasman District Council, Print: Settled in part, Not Upheld in Part
- Complaint 18/320 Maori Language Commission, Television: Not Upheld
- Complaint 18/321 Hanes Australia, Berlei Bra, Television: Not Upheld
- Complaint 18/327 Lotto NZ, Out of Home, Not Upheld
- Complaint 18/332 NZ AIDS Foundation, Television, Not Upheld
- Complaint 18/349 Breast Cancer Foundation, Television: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/350 Skinny Mobile, Television: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/352 Heartland Bank, Television: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/353 Real Groovy, Newspaper: Settled – Advertisement changed
- Complaint 18/355 DB Breweries, Out of Home: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/360 Vodafone, Television: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/361 Peaches and Cream, Radio, No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/364 Health Promotion Agency, Television: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/365 Tower Insurance, Television: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/367 Snapfish, Addressed Mail: No Grounds to Proceed
- Complaint 18/376 Mediaworks- The Rock, Television, No Grounds to Proceed
Therapeutic Claims Must Be Backed Up by Sufficient Evidence
The website advertisement for QE Health made a number of therapeutic claims about the benefits of massage. For example: Therapeutic Massage “increases blood and lymph circulation, assisting in the clearing of toxins”, Pregnancy Massage is beneficial for “preventing discomforts such as back pain, headaches and constipation…” and Stone Massage “helps increase the elasticity of collagen fibers in tendons, promoting greater flexibility”.
The Complainant was concerned the advertisement made unsubstantiated therapeutic claims.
The Advertiser said there are numerous examples within the literature regarding the effect of massage on specific conditions and complaints and a list of references to support this point was provided.
The Complaints Board considered each therapeutic claim in turn and agreed sufficient substantiation had been provided for some of the claims. However, the Complaints Board said sufficient substantiation had not been provided for the other claims, including: Therapeutic Massage “Decreases muscle tension and pain”, “Increases blood and lymph circulation, assisting in the clearing of toxins”, Manual Lymphatic Drainage (MLD) “may also help many specific conditions such as eczema and sinus problems. Primarily used for … improving the immune system & detoxification…” and “Helps alleviate water bloating through water retention”.
The Complaints Board ruled the complaint was Upheld, in part.
Humour Acceptable in Context
The Maori Language Commission television advertisement for Te Wiki o te Reo Māori (Māori Language Week) showed three well-known comedians talking about Te Wiki o te Reo Māori, using both English and Māori. One of the men gets confused and says: “Speaking English better than you, speaking English really fluently”. When one of the others interrupts and says: ”But this is actually about te reo Māori” the first man indicates he is embarrassed about making a mistake and reacts by saying “English sucks”. They all laugh.
The Complainants said they found the advertisement offensive because of the use of the phrase “English sucks”. One of the complainants said the Māori language did not need to be promoted by insulting English. Another complainant said they found the advertisement degrading and racist.
The Advertiser said the intention of the advertisement was to break down any sense of excessive ‘reverence’ about te reo Māori and the idea that it should be spoken only by fully fluent experts who are themselves part of the Māori community. The advertisement is intentionally over-the-top and presented exaggerated scenarios. The Advertiser said the joke in the advertisement is based on the idea that although it is Māori Language Week one actor got confused and started promoting the English language.
The Complaints Board acknowledged the use of humour in the advertisement as a means of getting the message across and said that even if some viewers didn’t understand the joke they would still have realised the advertisement was meant to be funny. The Complaints Board agreed that while some viewers may have taken offence at the use of the phrase “English sucks” it was a throwaway line, used in jest, and it was acceptable in the overall context of the advertisement. Accordingly, the complaint was ruled Not Upheld.