ASA Adjudication on AMI Clinic Ltd

Ad

A poster for AMI Clinic Ltd (AMI) stated in large, prominent lettering 'WANT LONGER LASTING SEX?' The word 'SEX' appeared in very large lettering. Smaller text stated 'NASAL DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY CALL THE DOCTORS AT ADVANCED MEDICAL INSTITUTE'.

Issue

1.  521 complainants believed the poster was offensive and, therefore, unsuitable for display in public locations, which included near schools and in areas with a high Jewish population, where it could be seen by children, and

2. The ASA challenged whether the poster advertised an unlicensed medicine.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1.  AMI explained that the marketing campaign sought to address serious men's health issues while removing the stigma and taboo associated with seeking help for them.  Independent research confirmed that only 11% of men with a sexual dysfunction sought medical advice.  AMI pointed out that, in addition, only a small number of those who did take the first step were willing to follow up and obtain treatment.  They said research had shown that, in many cases, men were too embarrassed to talk to a doctor or visit a pharmacy despite widespread publicity of these conditions since the launch of Viagra.  They believed sometimes bold, arresting statements were the only way of successfully engaging men and promoting the availability of treatment and removing the perceived embarrassment or shame associated with seeking it.  They said they never intended to cause offence, but given the nature of their business, it was inevitable that some people would be embarrassed or offended by the directness of AMI's campaign.  They pointed out, however, that they had complied with the request of the ASA and withdrawn all posters, without prejudice, pending the outcome of the investigation.    

AMI said, in their view, there was nothing irresponsible in talking about sexual problems in an open manner and pointed out that frank discussions of people's sexual problems had been present in the media for decades.  They said it appeared, from the number of people who participated in open debates on the subject on the radio, for example, that there was a clear need for members of the public to address their sexual problems.  

They pointed out that press advertising, which featured the text '... do you want longer lasting sex', had been approved by the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Copy Advice team and that merely enlarging the word 'SEX' on a poster, which was appropriate for the different medium and wholly relevant to AMI's treatment of sexual problems, did not make them irresponsible towards consumers or wider society.  They believed 21st Century Britain was more than able to cope with the content of the campaign without serious or widespread offence being caused.  Although they recognised a number of complaints had been received, they believed in the wider context of reality TV programmes, 'lads mags', online content, the commonality of graphic simulated sex on prime-time TV and film and factual shows such as Channel 4's 'Embarrassing Illnesses/Bodies', we were living in a more liberal and tolerant age than, for example, ten years ago.

They pointed out that a recent high-profile poster campaign for the 2008 film 'Sex and the City' emblazoned the word 'SEX' in very large lettering all over the UK and posters for the film 'Sex Drive', used the imagery of a speed dial as a prone man's erect penis and included the text 'COMING SOON'.  AMI said their poster highlighted a serious medical condition and was significantly less obtrusive in their opinion than other posters.  They further believed the word 'sex', in itself, could and should not cause offence to any great degree.

AMI said, in their opinion, the number of complaints was relatively small in the context of the number of people who could have seen the poster.  They believed any unintentional offence that had been caused was not serious or widespread: the poster included no swearing, innuendo, inappropriate or suggestive imagery or nudity.  

AMI believed the poster could not have caused serious offence or harm through placement near a school or in an area with a high Jewish population.  Although it could prompt children to ask questions, they believed most children learnt about sex through sources other than a poster, for example, magazines.  They pointed out that it was a publicised Government plan that children as young as five-years-of-age would be given sex education.  In addition, they believed there was nothing in the poster that was likely to offend the Jewish community in particular. Jewish Law permitted sex within the context of marriage and nothing in the poster campaign suggested, promoted, encouraged or implied anything against that view.  AMI also pointed out that they were understanding of religious sensitivities but that sexual problems were not excluded from any specific religion and there was no reason why any part of the community should be ignored or treated differently for reasons of ethnicity or religion.    

2.  AMI said the generally accepted definition of a medicine was 'any drug or remedy that treats or prevents or alleviates the symptoms of disease, illness or pain'.  They believed they had not promoted or advertised a medicine or referred to any medication, attributes or functions of any medicines, but rather had advertised a delivery system relating to treatment.  They said the poster clearly stated that AMI owned nasal delivery technology and added that the CAP Code did not state that the advertising (or indirect advertising) of a delivery method for a medicine was prohibited.  

Furthermore, AMI said they provided a medical service offering treatment programs to the public.  They said the phrase 'Want longer lasting sex?' did not relate to a medicine but the treatment programmes provided.  They said any medicine the treatment incorporated was prescribed by UK-registered doctors and provided by a pharmacy as part of the programme.  They explained that they did not hold a marketing authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) for any medicines because none was needed for their particular treatments; they were not advertising medicines.

AMI believed there was an important and vital difference between medical service advertising and advertising medicines.  They said in some cases, the treatment of male sexual problems involved only counselling, or counselling could be provided free to patients for whom medicine was also necessary. A fully-qualified Managing Health and Social Care (MHSC) Psychosexual Therapist & Counsellor who specialised in sexual dysfunction was a member of AMI's full-time staff.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted AMI's argument that the poster delivered their message in a blunt and direct manner, which included the word 'SEX' in large lettering, but incorporated no swearing, suggestive imagery or nudity.  We also noted, however, a number of people who had seen the posters had felt that the language used was offensive and inappropriate for general public display.

We understood that many people also considered the posters' bright colours and very large text, including the word 'SEX' to attract attention, was unsubtle and crass.  We also understood that the word 'SEX', in itself, had caused concern in many cases and, in the context of 'WANT LONGER LASTING SEX?', which related directly to sexual intercourse, had also caused embarrassment amongst some parents or guardians who had been quizzed about its meaning by children.  A number of complainants pointed out to us that the sheer size and prominence of the message made it impossible to avoid, which they found very uncomfortable.

We recognised that the sensitive nature of the message AMI wanted to deliver about their product and the treatment programmes they offered could be intrusive to some readers under any circumstances.  We also noted the poster contained nothing explicit, and considered that the word 'sex' was not necessarily problematic in itself.  We considered, however, that the style and tone of this ad, with direct reference to sexual intercourse through the phrase 'Want longer lasting sex?', was presented in too stark and prominent a manner, and as a result were concerned that it had caused both serious and widespread offence.

In view of this, we concluded that the poster was unsuitable for public display.  

On this point, the poster breached CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Responsible advertising) and 5.1 (Decency).

2.  Upheld

We noted AMI's argument that the poster did not promote or advertise a medicine, but instead advertised the way in which the medicine would be administered to patients: through nasal delivery technology.  

We noted their argument that the phrase 'WANT LONGER LASTING SEX?' related to their treatment programmes and, whilst we recognised that AMI also offered counselling services, we considered that by including that phrase and making reference to nasal delivery, AMI had indirectly advertised the medicine itself.

We noted that the medicine was available by prescription only and that AMI did not hold a marketing authorisation for any medicines prescribed as part of their treatment programmes.  We therefore concluded that the poster had indirectly advertised an unlicensed medicine, which was available only on prescription, to the public.

On this point, the poster breached CAP Code clause 50.11 (Medicines).

Action

The poster must not appear again in its current form. References to 'nasal delivery' must be removed. Other phrases which could be interpreted as referring to medicines must not be used.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)