Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Not upheld.
Ad description
A TV ad for Clear Score, a credit checking service, seen in March 2017. The ad showed a man in the bath, using a mobile phone to check his credit score.
Issue
The ASA received three complaints, all from complainants who had seen recent reports of a death caused by a plugged-in mobile phone being used in the bath.
1. Two complainants challenged whether the ad was irresponsible and condoned or encouraged behaviour that prejudiced health or safety.
2. One complainant challenged whether the ad featured behaviour that could be dangerous for children to emulate.
Response
Clear Score Technology Ltd said when producing the ad, they had considered whether it was responsible to show somebody holding a mobile phone in the bath. They said, together with their agency, they had carried out research which showed that, if a low-voltage phone were to fall into water, it would pose no physical risk to the bather. They said, if the phone had been plugged in that would have been a different matter, but noted that it was clearly not connected to a power source in the ad.
Clearcast said, although they regretted that the complainants were concerned and had been reminded of the distressing news reports, they thought it was very important to stress that the scenario in the ad was different because, although the man was using a mobile phone, it was not plugged in. In the reports of the recent death caused by a plugged-in mobile phone being used in the bath, it had been stressed that the danger came specifically from using a phone which was plugged into the mains electricity – not simply from using a phone in the bath. Safety campaigners quoted at the time mentioned that using a mobile phone which was not plugged in was not a particularly dangerous activity; the voltage of a mobile phone was so low that dropping one into a bath in which someone was sitting would be highly unlikely to do them any damage. It was much more likely that the phone would be damaged, although many more modern phones were waterproof or water resistant and often demonstrated in their marketing that they would not be damaged by brief immersion in water.
Clearcast had been content to approve the ad on the basis that the action shown was not irresponsible, did not condone or encourage behaviour prejudicial to standard health and safety practices, and would not be harmful if emulated by children.
Assessment
1. & 2. Not upheld
The ASA noted that news articles around the time the ad appeared had reported the death of a man following the submersion of a mobile phone into the bath, while it was connected to the mains. We acknowledged that the complainants had noted similarities with the scenario in the ad.
We noted that, in the ad, the phone was clearly not connected to a phone charger (and therefore to the mains), and was therefore unlikely to pose a significant risk to the man using it. Were viewers to emulate his behaviour, therefore, it was unlikely to prejudice their health or safety. Further, we considered that viewers were likely to understand the risks posed by using electrical items plugged into mains electricity around water, and were likely to appreciate the difference between the actions of the man and the more dangerous behaviour of using a phone which was plugged into the mains.
We acknowledged that children might be more naïve in regard to such dangers. We noted that the ad related to checking credit scores, and given the product being advertised and the content of the ad, we considered that it was unlikely to appeal to children and cause them to copy the practice as a result.
Given that, and the lack of danger which dropping a phone into water was likely to pose when not connected to a charger, we considered the ad did not condone or encourage behaviour that prejudiced health or safety, and did not feature behaviour that could be dangerous for children to emulate. We therefore concluded that it was not irresponsible.
We investigated the ad under BCAP Code rules
1.2
1.2
Advertisements must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to the audience and to society.
(Social responsibility),
4.1
4.1
Advertisements must contain nothing that could cause physical, mental, moral or social harm to persons under the age of 18.
and
4.4
4.4
Advertisements must not include material that is likely to condone or encourage behaviour that prejudices health or safety.
(Harm and offence),
5.2
5.2
Advertisements must not condone, encourage or unreasonably feature behaviour that could be dangerous for children to emulate. Advertisements must not implicitly or explicitly discredit established safety guidelines. Advertisements must not condone, encourage or feature children going off alone or with strangers.
This rule is not intended to prevent advertisements that inform children about dangers or risks associated with potentially harmful behaviour.
(Children) and
32.3
32.3
Relevant timing restrictions must be applied to advertisements that, through their content, might harm or distress children of particular ages or that are otherwise unsuitable for them.
(Scheduling of television and radio advertisements), but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
