Cookies policy statement
We are using cookies on our site to provide you with the best user experience.
Disabling cookies may prevent our website from working efficiently. Click ok to remove this message (we will remember your choice).
OK

ASA Adjudication on Camelot Group Ltd

Camelot Group Ltd t/a The National Lottery

The National Lottery
Tolpits Lane
Watford
Hertfordshire
WD18 9RN

Date:

1 September 2010

Media:

Television

Sector:

Leisure

Number of complaints:

2

Agency:

AMV BBDO Ltd

Complaint Ref:

131310

Ad

A TV ad, for the Euromillions lottery, opened with a filmic military style tropical beach landing, involving men in black tops, helicopters and jet skis. The men winched down into the jungle and began a game of paintball. Players were depicted being shot by one another with various coloured paintballs. The eventual winner, covered in rainbow colours, was feted by his fellows accompanied by on-screen text stating "There are Millionaires. Then there are EuroMillionaires".

Issue

Two viewers objected that one of the paintball hits involved a player shooting another player in the groin at close range, which they believed was irresponsible, as paintball could cause injury if played in a reckless manner.

BCAP TV Code

Response

Camelot Group Ltd (Camelot) said the concept behind the ad, which depicted the ultimate paintballing experience, was that EuroMillions winners were potentially able to use their wealth to share the most incredible experiences with their family and friends. They said it was important to note that the ad itself was not for paintballing.

Camelot said, during the pre-production of the ad, they were nevertheless very aware of the safety restrictions around paintballing. They said they had worked with Clearcast to ensure that everyone was wearing protective clothing, gloves and face masks. They said, because the masks obscured actors' faces, it was felt visual humour was needed to boost the comic impact of the ad; that included one team member coming down a rope and being hit before the game started, whilst another participant tried in vain to hide behind a stick-thin tree. They said, in addition to physical comedy, the ad also re-enacted various well-known film references, Rambo for example, to accentuate the comic nature of the paintball game and the ad.

Camelot said, due to the camaraderie and humour portrayed throughout the paintball fight, in combination with the clearly exaggerated nature of the commercial, they felt it was acceptable to include the light-hearted scene of someone being shot in the groin. They said their consumer research indicated that the scene was appreciated by viewers as one of the funniest, and represented a quick visual gag emphasising the fact that this was a harmless paintball fight between friends.

Clearcast said they had worked very closely with the agency to ensure the ad was responsible. They pointed out that all the actors were wearing the right protective equipment. They believed the ad had an over-the-top comedy feel to it and that viewers would understand it was not an ordinary game of paintball. They said the ad had an ex-kids restriction because it was for a Lottery game and they believed no one would think to emulate the groin shot, given the fantasy comedy setting in which it appeared.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted that the UK Paintball Association advised on its website that, due to the adventurous and unpredictable nature of paintball, there were various risks involved in the game. It laid out a set of advisory guidelines which included keeping goggles on at all times in the game zone, wearing the correct safety equipment and never shooting someone within three metres (ten feet).

However, we acknowledged that the ad involved a fantasy setting on a tropical island and, while we understood that being hit by a paintball could be painful and players of paintball were advised to follow certain safety guidelines, we considered that most viewers of the ad would see the sequence merely as a comedy moment. We considered that, in the context of the whole ad, the sequence was unlikely to encourage or condone behaviour prejudicial to health and safety and concluded that it did not breach the Code on those grounds.

We investigated the ad breached under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 6.7 (Harm and offence: health and safety) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)

Making a complaint

Find out what types of ads we deal with and how to make a complaint.

How to complain

Adjudications

View our latest weekly ASA adjudications or search for rulings from the last five years.

Adjudications

Non-compliant online advertisers

Check the list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Non-compliant online advertisers

Sign up

Sign up for adjudications alerts and newsletters.

Sign up

Already registered? Log in

Follow Us

For ASA news, including our weekly rulings, press releases, research and reports.
ASA_UK

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

We work hard to ensure our complaints procedures are transparent. Here we answer some commonly asked questions about how we handle complaints.

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London WC1V 6QT  |  Copyright © 2012 ASA