Background

Rule 32.2.1 of the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising (the BCAP Code) states that alcohol ads should not be shown in or around programmes commissioned for, principally targeted at or likely to appeal particularly to audiences below the age of 18 years.

In practice, programmes commissioned for or principally targeted at under-18s are identifiable by their content. Programmes likely to appeal particularly to under-18s are not so easy to identify.

Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP) guidance recommends the use of audience indexing, a statistical tool, to determine the representation of children in relation to the audience as a whole. BCAP guidance states that an alcohol restriction should be applied in programmes where the 10- to 15-year-olds audience, indexed against the total audience of all individuals over four years old, produces an index of 120 or more. An index of 120 would mean that 10- to 15-year-olds are 20% over-represented in the programme audience compared to the audience as a whole.

Audience indexing can be used as a tool for forecasting prospective audiences using historical data. An index over 120, when looked at retrospectively, is not necessarily indicative of a breach of the Code. The test is whether the broadcaster used the predictive tools available to schedule advertising with reasonable thoroughness and care.

The ASA Compliance team received research data from Ofcom about television programmes that contained centre-break alcohol advertisements in Q4 2012. This research was based on Broadcasters' Audience Research Board (BARB) data for this period and showed ads where the 10- to 15-year-olds audience, indexed against the audience of individuals over four years old, produced an index of 120 or higher.

Ofcom commissioned this research as part of a review into children's exposure to alcohol advertising on television. Ofcom passed this information to the ASA to assess whether the data indicated breaches of Rule 32.2.1 of the BCAP Code. The ASA commissioned further data for February, March and April 2013.

Ad description

Episodes of the programme How I Met Your Mother were broadcast on E4 and E4+1 throughout Q4 2012 and February, March, April 2013. The data indicated that the audience index for alcohol ads in these programmes exceeded the 120 limit in:

1. 12 episodes in Q4 2012 and 14 episodes in February, March, April 2013 on E4 in the 1pm to 2.59pm time slot;

2. 11 episodes in Q4 2012 and 10 episodes in February, March, April 2013 on E4+1 in the 2pm to 2.59pm time slot;

3. six episodes in Q4 2012 and 25 episodes in February, March, April 2013 on E4 in the 8pm to 8.59pm time slot.

Issue

The ASA Compliance team challenged whether it was appropriate to schedule alcohol ads in How I Met Your Mother in the specified time slots because the data indicated it was a programme likely to appeal particularly to audiences below the age of 18 years.

Response

Channel Four Television Corporation (E4) said that after initial viewing they considered the programme was not likely to appeal particularly to audiences below the age of 18 years.

1. & 2. E4 said that their audience monitoring procedures indexed at an aggregate level, including all regions and +1 transmissions of a programme, in order to utilise the most robust audience data available.

Due to small audience sizes on E4 and E4+1 in daytime slots, small increases in child viewers could cause a breach of the 120 index. E4 said that they chose to restrict alcohol ads in the programme at weekends and school holidays in order to remain within the spirit of the Code. They also restricted alcohol ads in the programme on weekdays between 3pm and 7.59pm.

E4 provided a table showing that in the 12 months from May 2012 to May 2013 (excluding August 2012 when the restriction was in place) the monthly average index for weekday term times exceeded 120 in one of 12 months (February 2013). They said the series performance as a whole did not exceed 120 in the weekday term-time periods when alcohol ads were not restricted and therefore a restriction was not needed at these times.

E4 said the data showed an incident on Saturday 3 November 2012 when an alcohol ad was shown despite the weekend restriction. This was an isolated incident due to human error. They said they are currently exploring ways to automate more of the process to reduce the risk of human error occurring in the future.

3. E4 said that the programme had been regularly scheduled at 8pm on E4 since November 2011.

They said they monitored the programme and provided a table showing that in the first six months of transmission the monthly average index exceeded 120 in one month out of six before reverting to below 120. E4 said their usual working process was to review the series on a quarterly basis and act upon any audience changes.

They said that unfortunately the process was not followed on this occasion so they were unable to respond to the change in the audience profile. E4 provided a table showing that after the first six months, the monthly average index exceeded 120 in 10 out of 12 months from May 2012 to April 2013.

E4 said they had now restricted alcohol ads in all programmes in the 8pm to 8.59pm time slot on the E4 channel.

Assessment

The ASA considered that How I Met Your Mother, a programme described on the Channel 4 website as a “comedy about five friends living in New York City [that] takes place in a continual flashback narrated by the future Ted telling the story of the erstwhile Ted’s love life”, could appeal to under-18s. We therefore considered that forecasting using audience indexing was the appropriate means for E4 to determine whether the programme was likely to appeal particularly to audiences below the age of 18 years.

1. & 2. Upheld

The ASA noted E4’s view that using audience indexing to forecast afternoon transmissions was prone to volatility due to small audience figures.

We accepted that aggregating indexing data between regional and +1 versions of the same channel could be a reasonable practice when formulating data for forecasting purposes, particularly when audiences on the regional or +1 channel were very low, although broadcasters should bear in mind that likely audiences may differ by date (e.g. weekends or school holidays), channel and time-slot.

Although we considered that restricting alcohol ads during school holidays and weekends could be seen as a reasonable measure to remain within the spirit of the Code, we were concerned that this process was not followed on Saturday 3 November 2012 and Sunday 3 March 2013, when alcohol ads were broadcast in the programme at weekends. Because the data indicated that this process was not followed effectively, we concluded that the scheduling of alcohol ads in How I Met Your Mother on these weekend afternoons breached the BCAP Code.

Furthermore, we considered that E4 should have taken action when they discovered that the index exceeded 120 in weekday afternoons in February 2013 because this indicated a change in the audience profile for the programme in these time slots.

We further considered that although the use of a monthly period to determine the series index for a particular time-slot could be a useful tool in the forecasting process, it may still result in unreasonable delays when responding to audience changes unless the data was looked at on a more regular basis.

The scheduling breached BCAP Code rule  32.2.1 32.2.1 alcoholic drinks containing 1.2% alcohol or more by volume (see rule 32.4.7)  (Scheduling of Television and Radio Advertisements, Under-18s).

3. Upheld

The ASA noted that E4 had a process to review How I Met Your Mother's monthly average index on a quarterly basis after the first six months of transmission and act upon audience changes. We were concerned, however, that this process was not followed, particularly after the programme indexed 144 in December 2011, and E4 did not notice that the monthly average index for the programme exceeded 120 in 10 out of 12 months after the first six months. This resulted in a number of alcohol ads being broadcast to audiences where the 10- to 15-year-olds audience index exceeded 120.

Furthermore, we considered that even if the process was followed, a quarterly review period would not have been sufficient to comply with the Code. A quarterly review period could result in a situation where a programme consistently exceeded the 120 index for three months before action was taken, which should not be possible in a compliant forecasting process.

We also considered that although the use of a monthly period to determine the series index for a particular time-slot could be a useful tool in the forecasting process, it may still result in unreasonable delays when responding to audience changes unless the data was looked at on a more regular basis.

Although we acknowledged that action was taken and alcohol ads had been restricted in all programmes in the 8pm to 8.59 time slot on E4, we considered the failure to monitor and act upon changes in audience indices resulted in the scheduling of alcohol ads in breach of the BCAP Code.

The scheduling breached BCAP Code rule  32.2.1 32.2.1 alcoholic drinks containing 1.2% alcohol or more by volume (see rule 32.4.7)  (Scheduling of Television and Radio Advertisements, Under-18s).

Action

We told E4 to ensure they review series data on a more regular basis and act upon changes in the index. If a programme is restricted they should make sure that the restriction is enforced.

BCAP Code

32.1     32.2     32.2.1     32.2.1    


More on