ASA Adjudication on Direct Line Group Ltd
Direct Line Group Ltd
Direct Line House
3 Edridge Road
Croydon
Surrey
CR9 1AG
Date:
27 August 2008
Media:
Radio
Sector:
Financial
Number of complaints:
33
Agency:
MC Saatchi
Complaint Ref:
60838
Ad
A radio ad for car insurance against vandalism featured a sports-style commentary which stated: “John is brilliant as a vandal, the way he cuts the paintwork using a key is Picasso-like and he runs over a whole car with ease, leaving only his trainers' footprints as a signature and could smash a window with a brick from eight feet. Now that's a talent. John will be appearing in a car park near you today”. A female voice-over then stated “If you're the victim of John's handy work, Direct Line Insurance won't penalise you, as vandalism cover that preserves your no-claims discount is now standard. It pays to be with the right insurer. Visit directline.com. Comprehensive cover required”.
Issue
33 listeners challenged whether the ad glorified and encouraged vandalism, particularly amongst adolescent boys.
BCAP Radio Code
2.9; 2.10
Response
Direct Line Group Ltd (Direct Line) said they regretted the offense caused to some listeners. They explained that the first part of the ad was a spoof movie review and juxtaposed a positive-sounding voice-over with a description of anti-social behaviour to create a dramatic, ironic effect. The second part of the ad revealed a serious message regarding insurance cover.
Direct Line said the ad had not featured on radio stations specifically targeting the youth market; the target demographic was mid-30s and older. They pointed out it was not in their commercial interests to promote vandalism. They said they had not intended to glorify or encourage vandalism. They said the ad was no longer on air and they did not intend to use it in the future.
The Radio Advertising Clearance Centre (RACC) confirmed that they had cleared the ad for broadcast. They believed listeners would understand the ad was mimicking a film review and that the tone was ironic. They pointed out that the scenario aimed to highlight that vandalism occurred and that listeners could prepare for such acts. They did not consider that the ad glorified or encouraged vandalism.
Bauer Radio said it understood the ad was a spoof film review from a reputable insurer. It was not intended to glorify or encourage vandalism. It said the ad was not aired on any stations directed at children. GCap had nothing further to add to Bauer's response.
Assessment
Not upheld
The ASA noted that the radio stations which broadcast the ad were not targeted at teenage boys. We considered the light-hearted tone of the ad was likely to be understood by most listeners as being ironic in nature and that it was not condoning or encouraging violent behaviour. Because of that and because the ad was not targeted at the youth market, we did not consider the ad was in beach of the code.
We investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) Radio Advertising Standards Code section 2 rule 9 (Good taste, decency and offence to public feeling) and rule 10 (Harm) but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)
