ASA Adjudication on Sony Computer Entertainment UK Ltd

Ad

A national press ad, two TV ads and four internet ads for a Sony PlayStation 3 game. a. The national press ad, in The Guardian Weekend magazine and the Sunday Times magazine, comprised six pages. The first page featured a building that appeared to be a hotel. Text below read "People have been searching for this place for years. But nobody seems to know where on earth it is ... The residents certainly aren't gonna [sic] tell anybody ...". The following pages featured different men and women. Text below gave details about them. The penultimate page featured an image of a man who was holding a knife and appeared to be in a jungle. Text beneath read "LT KOVAC ... ORPHANED AGED SEVEN. JOINED THE CROATIAN ARMY EXACTLY TEN YEARS LATER ... KOVAC RAPIDLY DISCOVERED HE HAD A PROBLEM WITH AUTHORITY. HE WENT AWOL AND BECAME A FREEDOM FIGHTER. KOVAC HAS SEEN IT ALL BEFORE AND BECOME SOMETHING OF AN ARMCHAIR PHILOSOPHER. WHEN HE TALKS, YOU'LL LISTEN ... THE SCARS ON HIS BODY CAN ONLY HINT AT HIS LIFE STORY - IT'S THE MENTAL SCARS THAT TELL THE TRUTH ... TRUTH BE TOLD, HE'S NOT READY TO GO BACK INTO POLITE SOCIETY, PROBABLY NEVER WILL BE ... ". The last page showed a jungle scene. The words "This is living PLAYSTATION 3" featured in the middle of the page beside the PlayStation logo. Text at the foot of the page read "thisisliving.tv". b. The first TV ad featured the character, Kovac, sitting in a bath. He said "What is living? Is it working like a robot until we become obsolete? Watching so much TV news you are too terrified to go out and buy the bar of chocolate you need to make yourself feel safe? Is that really what you're here for? Maybe God's grand plan was for you to sit in a meeting for 65 long years striving for idiocracy? Congratulations! You've been named Employee of the Month. Do you want pride with that? One man's living is another man's dying. Now if you'll excuse me. I need to go and buy myself a bar of chocolate." He grabbed a gun from inside the bath and pointed it at the camera. He then started laughing. The ad ended with the PlayStation logo and the text "PlayStation 3". c. The second TV ad showed the character, Kovac, sitting in a bath. He said "What is living?". The ad then featured scenes showing various characters, some of whom appeared to be telling stories to the camera. Kovac was shown again, sitting in a bath, first sideways on and then facing the camera. He said "Now if you'll excuse me, I need to buy myself a bar of chocolate" and grabbed a gun from inside the bath that he pointed at the camera. In the next scene, another character, Cherry, was sitting on the toilet wearing a bra and had her underpants around her ankles. She said "That is living" as she pulled the toilet chain. On-screen text read "23.03.07 thisisliving.ie". d. The first internet ad, shown on Yahoo and BT Internet mail, featured the character Cherry wearing her underwear. She was sitting on the toilet, wearing a bra. Her underpants were around her ankles and she was pulling the toilet chain. On-screen text read "If I show you more will you listen to me I just wanna be famous and write my grandma: I'm OK dreams are real - right?" Text continued "Cherry Talent or Vacant?" e. The second internet ad, on Yahoo and BT, showed the character Kovac holding a knife and then a gun. On-screen text read "You on my side? listen up I've killed for less the music plays Puccini in my head". Text continued "Kovac Mercenary or Misunderstood?". f. The third internet ad, on Yahoo and BT, showed two images of the character Plato. In one, he was wearing his underpants and in the second, he had a naked female sitting astride him on a bed, as he looked at his watch. On-screen text read "Life's a game of two halves I score I shoot the crowd roars I'm never going home". Text continued "Plato Idol or Idle?". g. The fourth internet ad, on Yahoo, showed the characters Lucia and Hotdog. On-screen text read "I love you I love you too get your ass over here let's do it where's the money?". Text continued "Hotdog & Lucia Enduring Romantics or Incurable Criminals?". All internet ads finished with the text "This is living", "PlayStation 3" and the PlayStation logo.

Issue

1. Some complainants challenged whether the gun and knife featured in ads (a), (b), (c) and (e) could be seen to condone or glamorise violence or anti-social behaviour, especially amongst young people.

2. Some complainants challenged whether the image of the character Cherry on the toilet in ads (c) and (d) was offensive and unsuitable to be seen by children.

3. Some complainants challenged whether the image of a naked woman astride a man in ad (f) was offensive and unsuitable to be seen by children.

4. One complainant challenged whether the use of the word "ass" in ad (g) was unsuitable in an ad that could be seen by children.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

BCAP TV Code

Response

1. TBWA, responding on behalf of Sony, said the image of Kovac holding the knife in ad (a) was intended to represent an image of war, as described by his biography at the bottom of the page, and added that both The Weekend Guardian and the Sunday Times often carried editorial content featuring more extreme images of war. They said internet ad (e) also targeted an adult audience. TBWA said neither ad was intended to represent, nor describe, socially acceptable or aspirational behaviour.

TBWA said they believed TV ads (b) and (c) did not feature content that undermined accepted moral, social or cultural standards and did not encourage or condone violence or cruelty. They argued that no character was shown being injured or hurt by the gun and added that it was never pointed at anyone because Kovac was shown alone in the room. They added that Kovac never turned the gun on himself and there was therefore no suggestion that he was threatening to cause physical harm. TBWA asserted that the scenes showing the gun were not presented in an aspirational or glamorous light. They told the ASA that TV ads (b) and (c) targeted an adult audience and were broadcast after 7.30pm to avoid offending younger viewers.

The Sunday Times said they had considered ad (a) in its entirety. They said they believed that, in spite of the presence of the knife and gun, the ad did not condone or glamorise violence.

The Guardian said they believed the knife featured in ad (a) would be judged by the context in which it appeared. They pointed out that their publication targeted adults and carried no editorial content targeting children. They said the style of the ad was dark and edgy but in no way glamorised or condoned violent or anti-social behaviour.

The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) said they had worked very closely with TBWA over a number of months and had viewed many rough edits before approving the final versions of TV ads (b) and (c), because they had been aware that some viewers might have been sensitive to the content of the ads. They explained that they had historically cleared ads featuring guns with a post 9pm scheduling restriction, when the audience was likely to consist mostly of adults. The BACC said they thought such an audience would understand that the gun featured was a prop to explain Kovac's character and that the ad was not intended to glamorise gun crime. They conceded that, due to an internal error, they had applied a post 7.30pm scheduling restriction but added that, in spite of the error, the ads were, in fact, not aired before 9pm. They said they believed the TV ads were not in breach of the Code.

Yahoo said internet ad (e) targeted registered users over 18 years of age who had provided their date of birth at the time of registering their account and were logged into their site. They explained that their registration process would ensure children would not see the ads because they knew the identity of their registered users. They said they had asked Sony to produce a toned down version of the ad because of their concerns over the inclusion of the weapons. They explained that this final version had appeared on their site untargeted. Yahoo confirmed that they had not received any complaints about the ad.

2. TBWA said they had been careful to ensure that there was no explicit nudity in TV ad (c) and internet ad (d) and pointed out that Cherry was wearing opaque underwear. They said they believed that a scene featuring a woman on the toilet should not be considered offensive. They reiterated that both ads targeted adults and TV ad (c) had been given a post 19:30 scheduling restriction to reflect that.

The BACC said they had considered that the image of Cherry on the toilet with her underpants around her ankles in TV ad (c) was fractionally more explicit than similar ads. They said they had therefore applied a post 19:30 scheduling restriction to reduce the number of young children who might see the ad.

Yahoo said internet ad (d) targeted registered users over 18 years of age, because they considered that the content was unsuitable to be seen by children. They explained that their registration process would ensure children would not see the ads because they knew the identity of their registered users. They said they had not received any complaints about the ad and therefore considered that it had not caused serious or widespread offence.

3. TBWA said internet ad (f) targeted an adult audience and did not appear on any sites that targeted children. They also said Sony had produced a toned down version of the ad at Yahoo's request.

Yahoo said internet ad (f) targeted registered users over 18 years of age who had provided their date of birth at the time of registering their account and were logged into their site. They explained that their registration process would ensure children would not see the ads because they knew the identity of their registered users. They told the ASA that they had received two complaints. Yahoo said they believed the ads were appropriate in the context of the product being advertised, with each ad representing the different characters in the game.

BT said they had not received any complaints about the ad. They explained that Yahoo managed the advertising space for the BT Broadband portal. BT said the ads stopped appearing on Yahoo at the beginning of April and had been blocked from appearing on BT Internet Mail.

4. TBWA said internet ad (g) targeted sites that attracted an older audience and did not feature on any sites intended for children. They said the ad was sent to the media owners for approval and feedback and, in this instance, an 18+ rating was not deemed necessary. TBWA argued that the use of the word "ass" was commonplace in modern parlance and considered that the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence because of that.

Yahoo said the ad appeared on some of their sites but explained that their records showed that more than 75% of the audience for those sites was over 18 years.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted the comments made by TBWA, the BACC, Yahoo, The Sunday Times and The Guardian.

In relation to press ad (a), we noted both The Sunday Times and The Guardian targeted an adult readership that was likely to consider the ad as a whole. We considered that the "biography" at the bottom of the page explained the context of the image and made clear that the ad was promoting a video game. We concluded that the press ad was unlikely to be seen to condone or glamorise violence or anti-social behaviour, especially amongst young people.

In relation to internet ad (e), we noted Yahoo had shown the ad on sites targeting those over 18 years of age. We considered, however, that there was an underlying tone of violence in the ad and we were concerned that the images of Kovac holding the knife and the gun, in conjunction with the text "You on my side? listen up I've killed for less ... " could be seen to condone or glamorise violence or anti-social behaviour.

In relation to TV ads (b) and (c), we noted the ads were not shown before 9pm and the BACC had intended to apply that restriction to reduce the possibility of the ads being seen by young children. We noted Kovac appeared to be alone in the room and noted the gun was intended as a prop to demonstrate the disturbed nature of his character. We considered that TV ads (b) and (c) were surreal in their approach and concluded that viewers were unlikely to infer that they condoned or glamorised violence or anti-social behaviour. We concluded that they were acceptable to be aired with a post 9pm scheduling restriction.

On this point, we investigated press ad (a) under CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Responsibility), 11.1 (Violence) and 47.2 (Children) but did not find it in breach.

Internet ad (e) breached CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Responsibility) and 11.1 (Violence) but did not breach 47.2 (Children).

We investigated TV ads (b) and (c) under CAP Broadcast (TV) Advertising Standards Code rules 6.2 (Violence and cruelty) and 7.3.1 (Mental harm) but did not find them in breach.

2. Not upheld

We noted the BACC had applied a post 7.30pm scheduling restriction to TV ad (c) but had also said they had intended to apply a post 9pm scheduling restriction. We acknowledged that the TV ad was not aired before 9pm and noted Yahoo had been careful to feature the internet ad on sites that targeted users registered as over 18 years of age. We noted the content of the ads was not explicit and considered that most viewers would regard the image of Cherry on the toilet as light-hearted and humorous. We concluded that TV ad (c) and internet ad (d) were unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence provided that the TV ad was not aired before 9pm when young children might be watching.

On this point, we investigated TV ad (c) under CAP Broadcast (TV) Advertising Standards Code rules 6.1 (Offence) and 7.3.1 (Mental harm) but did not find it in breach. We investigated internet ad (d) under CAP Code clauses 5.1 (Taste and decency) and 47.2 (Children) but did not find it in breach.

3. Not upheld

We noted Sony had produced a toned down image of the ad for general circulation. We also noted the ad targeted registered users who were over 18 years of age and would only be seen by people who had registered their date of birth at the time of registering their account and were logged into the site. We considered that the ad was not unduly explicit and concluded that it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence to adult viewers.

We investigated internet ad (f) under CAP Code clauses 5.1 (Taste and decency) and 47.2 (Children) but did not find it in breach.

4. Not upheld

We noted the ad was intended to be seen primarily by an adult audience and noted the audience profile of the sites on which the ad featured was 75% over 18 years. We considered that the word "ass" was used in everyday language and that it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence to adults and that any children who did see the ad were unlikely to be harmed by it. We concluded that the ad was acceptable.

On this point, we investigated internet ad (g) under CAP Code clause 47.2 (Children) but did not find it in breach.

Action

We asked Sony to amend future internet ads where the content could be seen to condone or glamorise violence or anti-social behaviour.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)