Advertising Standards Authority Says VW Ad Too Violent For Children’s Hour

The Advertising Standards Authority has nixed a VW ad for pre-watershed viewing; it takes its inspiration from the Jason Bourne and Matrix films, and the agency notes that it’s too violent for children and might lead to “copycatting.” Here’s the ruling. Said the ASA in part:

The ASA noted VW’s argument that the fight sequences shown in ad (a) were stylised and fantastical and, along with other aspects of the creative treatment, distanced the action from reality. We also noted their argument that the ad did not show any physical suffering as a result of the fighting. We considered, however, that the opening punch to the Chief Engineer was shocking, and set up a series of violent set pieces that included the use of weapons. We also considered that, despite the absence of blood or other injuries, the punches, kicks and other fight moves were realistic in appearance and involved ordinary people in an everyday setting. We noted Clearcast’s argument that the ad had been given a timing restriction because of the level of fighting, which meant that it could not be shown before 7.30 pm, and we acknowledged that ad (a) had not been broadcast before 11 pm. Although we considered that ad (a) was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence in the post-11 pm slots in which it had been shown, we were concerned that, were the ad to be broadcast earlier in the evening, the opening punch and subsequent violence could cause serious offence and distress. We considered that the ad should have been given a timing restriction to ensure that it was limited to later in the evening, and we concluded that the ad was unsuitable to be broadcast before 9 pm.  

On this point ad (a) breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 7.4.7 (Use of scheduling restrictions).

Ad (a) also breached Rules on the Scheduling of Television Advertisements section 4.2.3 (Treatments unsuitable for children).

We also investigated ad (a) under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 6.1 (Offence) but did not find it in breach.

2. Upheld
We noted VW’s and Clearcast’s argument that, because ad (e) had significantly less interpersonal contact, it had been given an ‘ex-kids’ restriction. We understood that the ‘ex-kids’ restriction prevented the ad from being broadcast in or around programmes made for, or specifically targeted at, children. We noted that ad (e) opened with a shove as opposed to a punch, and that the ad did not feature the men fighting with weapons. We also noted that ad (d) did not show the men fighting with weapons. We considered that the level of interpersonal violence in ads (d) and (e) was less than in the other TV ads, and because of that we did not consider that ads (d) and (e) needed to be kept away from older children. We considered that the post-7.30 pm restriction applied to ad (d) and the ex-kids restriction applied to ad (e) were sufficient to keep the ad away from times when younger children were likely to be watching TV alone, and we considered that ads (d) and (e) were unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence when shown in accordance with those scheduling restrictions.

However, we considered that ad (c), which included the opening punch and the men fighting with weapons, featured a level of violence that was comparable to that shown in ad (a), and which could cause serious offence and distress when shown after 7.30 pm. We therefore considered that ad (c) should have been given a timing restriction that limited it to being shown later in the evening, and we concluded that ad (c) was also unsuitable to be broadcast before 9 pm.

On this point ad (c) breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 6.1 (Offence), 6.2 (Violence and cruelty), 7.4.1 (Mental Harm) and 7.4.7 (Use of scheduling restrictions).

Ad (c) also breached Rules on the Scheduling of Television Advertisements section 4.2.3 (Treatments unsuitable for children).

On this point we also investigated ads (d) and (e) under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 6.1 (Offence), 6.2 (Violence and cruelty), 7.4.1 (Mental Harm) and 7.4.7 (Use of scheduling restrictions) and Rules on the Scheduling of Television Advertisements section 4.2.3 (Treatments unsuitable for children) but did not find them in breach.