The Advertising Standard Authority.

The Advertising Standards Authority is the UK’s independent regulator of advertising across all media. They give the Advertising Codes, which are written by the Committees of Advertising Practise. At the start of the 60’s, the CAP (Committee of Advertising Practise) was made, they started off Britain’s Code of Advertising Practise. The ASA was set up in 1962 to control the media and advertisements under the new rules and regulations of the codes of practise; this was all for the benefit of the public interest.

Regulation.

I’m now going to look at how the CAP code of practise would relate and affect the 4 chosen adverts that I have looked at.

None of the adverts I have looked at have been actually banned off air so I have looked into way their advert could have or almost are breaking the CAP code of practise and looked into things they would of had to consider when creating these adverts. I have also found a banned adverts from one of the same company's I have looked at.

Children

When looking at adverts and how they could affect children, this is the principle taken in.

Pepsi-

Pepsi would have to consider what outfit’s and dance moves Beyonce includes for this advert as anything too suggestive would mean that this advert would only be allowed to be aired after a certain time as it would be classed as too ‘suggestive’ to be aired in the day, which would only be limiting themselves. However I would say that they do mildly get away with how they have displayed Beyonce for this advert as it isn’t going against any of the set rules of the ASA.

Innocent Orange Juice-

Innocent juice’s advert doesn’t appear to have any issues with their advert as they have not involved anything to cause offence or go again the rules of the ASA regarding children.

Galaxy –

Galaxy’s advert would have to take Audrey’s outfit into consideration as they wouldn’t want to put her in a ‘sexy’ look outfit as she did have that ‘dressy’ style to her but this could possibly affect the times the advert could be played which Galaxy wouldn’t want as it’s appealing to a board market. They would also have to consider how Audrey acts around the men and vice versa in the advert, as if there was anything too flirtatious or suggestive in the acting then this would be classed as inappropriate for a younger audience to view. Despite this I would Galaxy has mapped it out cleverly to avoid and overcome issues they could have possibly had with this advert and fits into the ASA’s rules nicely.

Three advert-

Three’s advert doesn’t seem to have any issues related to children in the ASA’s rules and they have not used any content that could possibly cause offence to these rules.

 

Food, food supplements and associated health or nutrition’s claims.

Pepsi-

Pepsi would also have to take into consideration on how they’re displaying their product, as it is a frizzy drink, they wouldn’t be able to lie about the contents of the drink i.e. saying its good for you, when its clearly not as this would be misleading to the public. They can’t say that the drink can benefit you in ways it won’t, such as weight loss etc. In a way Pepsi are doing this but without saying it, as it displays Beyonce getting a ‘kick’ from Pepsi which it probably wouldn’t do like its displaying in the advert, but as they are not up front saying that the drink will do anything for you it does fit under the ASA’s rules.

Innocent orange juice –

When the advert is explaining the benefits of how healthy the juice is and the fact that it uses all natural products to make the juice, they would have to be using only true statements in this part as otherwise they would be going against ASA’s rules. They would not be able to say the juice included nutrients that it doesn’t. They would have to write a script for the advert that involved true statements and facts about the juice so it would pass ASA’s standards.

The brand once produced an advert for their ‘Innocent smoothies’ that was questioned by the ASA as it claimed to be 2 of your 5 a day, once the ASA had looked into this, they soon realised the claim was based on facts so the advert continued to be aired.

 Galaxy –

When the advert is showing the actor – Audrey, eating the chocolate they would have to take into account how much of the chocolate she is eating as they can’t encourage excessive consumption of the chocolate, i.e. they wouldn’t be allowed to show someone eating a whole galaxy bar in a advert (however tempting that might be for the actor) as this would go against the rules of ASA. They have only included a short snippet of Audrey eating the chocolate so therefore this isn’t an issue and would have passed all the ASA’s rules.

Three advert-

As the three advert does not involve any food or drink content during the advert so this would pass all the ASA rules in this part.

 

Misleading advertising.

Three advert –

The current three advert is perfectly acceptable by the ASA as it isn’t making any claims about prices or products the brand is offering, however in the past they have had an advert banned by the ASA for being ruled as misleading. The advert included information about contracts which feature various pay monthly deals. There was a complaint put in by a customer that said it wasn’t made clear that Three could increase the monthly bill within the time contract. Three has increased its monthly tariffs in the middle of this year, as ASA noticed they hadn’t made this very clear, the ASA informed Three that they need to “ensure that they made any significant terms clear in future.” And that the advert was not too be aired in its current form again.

All of the other 3 adverts I looked into had passed the ASA’s rules for this section and did not offend any of the set conditions. Although Pepsi's advert is questionable as it could be classed as misleading as in the advert it seems that it gives Beyonce loads of energy which could be exaggering on what the drink really could do for you, but I think they get away with this as they havent stated that it does this, its more of a hidden meaning so it has been passed by the ASA.

 

Competitions-

There is actually only one rule for Competitions under ASA which is - Competitions should be conducted fairly, prizes should be described accurarely and rules should be clear and made known.

However, all of the adverts I have looked into have not included any information about adverts, even though Pepsi is running a competition along side the Beyonce advert to win tickets to see her in tour. Previously in Pepsi’s competitions they have had a problem with ASA as they ran a an on-pack promotion offering consumers the chance to win a £500 cash prize "every hour".

There was a complaint put in by a member of a family that entered 11,000 times and said his family had won several times but Pepsi was responded with the fact only one win would count. He objected to Pepsi’s ruling on the grounds that the restriction was not made clear in the marketing promotion. After the ASA looking into the complaint and Pepsi's terms and condititons, the ASA told Pepsi to ensure all future promotions were run fairly and conditions were made clear in the future. This could be one of the reasons why Pepsi havent aired their Competiton this time.