ASA Non-broadcast Adjudication: Accurist Watches Ltd

Complaint

Objection to an advertisement in Glamour magazine for a brand of watch. The advertisement featured a photograph of a naked woman reclining on a wooden chair; her hair concealed her right breast and a length of ribbon was wrapped around her ribs and right leg. The woman's right arm hung to her side while her left hand rested on her stomach and her fingers, slightly obscured by her right thigh, rested above her crotch. Below the photograph was text that stated "me time". The complainant objected that the photograph was demeaning and offensive because it portrayed female masturbation.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Adjudication

Complaint upheld

The advertisers said the model had her hand placed on the inside of the top of her leg. They said this was a natural and comfortable pose for the model. The advertisers said the photograph was chosen for its strength and integrity and that it was not intended to imply masturbation. They explained that the theme of the advertising campaign was "Me Time"; a campaign that was intended to acknowledge that most people led busy lives, juggling work, family and social activities. The advertisers believed "Me Time" underlined the point that readers should take time for themselves. The advertisers said they advertised in Glamour because the magazine's readers were savvy, sharp and intelligent women with a sense of humour. They said that the advertisement appeared in an issue of Glamour that featured sexually explicit editorial content. The advertisers reiterated that they had not intended to imply masturbation and did not believe the advertisement caused widespread offence because the advertisement had appeared in four women's magazines and they had received only two complaints. They said they had changed the image for future advertisements by removing the model's left hand from the photograph, to avoid any confusion with the strapline "Me Time".

The publishers said they booked the advertisement on the basis that the shot would be artistic and stylised but, after receiving two complaints and re-examining the advertisement, they acknowledged that the advertisement could be seen as demeaning and offensive by some readers. The publishers said the advertisement would not be run in Glamour again.

The Authority noted the advertisers' comments, but considered that the photograph was sexually suggestive and implied the woman was masturbating. It concluded that the advertisement was likely to cause serious or widespread offence to readers and welcomed the advertisers' decision to amend it.