ASA Adjudication on Kentucky Fried Chicken (Great Britain) Ltd
Kentucky Fried Chicken (Great Britain) Ltd t/a
KFC
32 Goldsworth Road
Woking
Surrey
GU21 6JT
Date:
9 December 2009
Media:
Television
Sector:
Food and drink
Number of complaints:
9
Agency:
Bartle Bogel Hegarty
Complaint Ref:
100700
Ad
A TV ad, for KFC, featured a busy restaurant kitchen. A young man, dressed in kitchen overalls, said "When I was younger, I wasn't interested in food at all. I was interested in eating food; very interested in that!" He was shown carrying a tray of chicken on the bone and battering it with flour before placing it on a wire tray. He said "The secret to producing the best food is using the right ingredients. Like this chicken, came in fresh this morning. Well, this is what it's all about. Preparing a fresh chicken by hand. Yeah, it is a lot of effort, but if a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well. I guess you could say I've learned a lot working here". Pieces of cooked breaded chicken were shown being taken off a wire tray and put into a KFC bucket, which was then pushed through to the KFC store counter where customers were seen eating the product. The voice-over said "KFC. Fresh, on the bone chicken, every store, every day" and, at the same time, on-screen text stated "Minimum 3 deliveries a week".
Issue
Nine viewers thought the ad was misleading, because the overall implication that the chicken was delivered daily was contradicted by the on-screen text.
BCAP TV Code
Response
KFC referred to a recent ASA adjudication on the ad, which ruled that it implied the chicken was delivered daily and gave viewers a misleading impression of the frequency of deliveries. In response to that adjudication, KFC added the on-screen text "Minimum 3 deliveries a week", but made no other changes to the ad. They said the size and duration of the on-screen text met legal requirements. They argued that the ad's message related to freshly prepared chicken on the bone, not to the frequency of deliveries. They believed only a few viewers would have misinterpreted the original ad and the on-screen text was added to avoid any misunderstanding. They were of the opinion that the on-screen text did not contradict anything that was stated in the ad.
Clearcast said the on-screen text appeared at the same time as the voice-over stated "Fresh, on the bone chicken, every store, every day". They considered that most viewers would interpret that voice-over claim to mean that every KFC store was able to provide chicken that was freshly prepared, and not frozen, on a daily basis. They disagreed with the ASA's interpretation, as stated in the recent adjudication, that viewers would understand that claim, along with "came in fresh this morning", to mean the chicken was delivered daily; they believed only a minority of viewers would interpret the ad in that way. Nevertheless, they requested the inclusion of the on-screen text "Minimum 3 deliveries a week" to qualify and clarify the voice-over and to comply with the recent adjudication. They did not accept that the on-screen text contradicted the voice-over or the ad's overall impression. Clearcast thought the ad now made very clear the frequency of deliveries and amplified the ad's message that KFC cooked and produced freshly made chicken, which had not been frozen, throughout the week.
Assessment
Not upheld
The ASA considered that, without the on-screen text, the claim "Fresh, on the bone chicken, every store, every day" might be seen as referring to the availability of fresh chicken every day, but was more likely to suggest that the chicken was delivered daily, particularly in conjunction with the claim "came in fresh this morning". However, we considered that the addition of the on-screen text "Minimum 3 deliveries a week" made clear the intended meaning: that chicken on the bone, fresh not frozen, was available in every store every day and was delivered to stores at least three times a week, not that the chicken was delivered daily. We considered that the addition of the on-screen text meant viewers would not be given a misleading impression of the frequency of deliveries.
We investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1.1 (Misleading advertising) and 5.2.2 (Implications) but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)