Background
Summary of Council decision:
Four issues were investigated, all of which were Not upheld.
Ad description
a. A TV ad for the computer game Battlefield 4 included a voice-over which stated, "If you're into rushing headlong into chaos, changing the map with one well placed shot, base jumping off of a sky scraper, joy riding tanks and the glorious mind-blowing freedom of all out war. We'll see you there." The ad featured scenes from the game. The ad was given an ex-kids restriction by Clearcast.
b. A VOD ad for the computer game Battlefield 4, which was the same as TV ad (a) was seen on 4OD, ITVplayer and STVplayer.
c. A website ad for the same game on the advertisers own website www.battlefield.com/uk included images of the game and the claims "Witness the glorious chaos of all-out war in the Battlefield 4 Multiplayer Launch Trailer" and "Get intel on the single player campaign and learn about the glorious chaos of all-out war in Battlefield 4 multiplayer".
Issue
Thirty-nine complaints were received.
1. All complainants objected that ads (a), (b) and (c), particularly the claims "the glorious mind-blowing freedom of all out war" and "the glorious chaos of all-out war" were offensive because they glamorised war.
2. Some of the complainants challenged whether ad (a) had been inappropriately scheduled for broadcast on Remembrance Sunday and on the days around it.
3. Some of complainants objected that ads (a), (b) and (c) were offensive and disrespectful to servicemen and woman and their families and to ex-members of the armed forces and their families.
4. Some of complainants challenged whether ad (a) was inappropriate for broadcast when it might be seen by children.
Response
1. Electronic Arts Ltd (EA) said the voice-over and text referred to by complainants was intended to emphasise the fact that the game had a 64-player multiplayer functionality (a first for a Battlefield game on console) and to communicate the chaotic nature of playing with that many people in the game. They said they had checked the wording several times with Clearcast throughout the clearing process and no issues had been raised about it being inappropriate. They said the ad mainly consisted of game footage and no real war scenes and believed it was obvious that the images were not real footage. They said there was never an intention to show any real war situations and it was not their intention to glamorise war.
Clearcast believed the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence and was unlikely to be seen to glamorise war. They understood the game was the fourth instalment in the popular Battlefield Series and that it did not include any realistic or familiar war situations that viewers were likely to recognise. They said they felt the game-play and scenes were in line with other similar titles.
Channel 4 said their policy was to pre-clear VOD ads through Clearcast and that in this case the ads were given a restriction which meant they were not shown in programmes commissioned for, principally directed at or likely to appeal to audiences below the age of 16 years. They said they therefore believed that the ad was appropriately restricted and served.
ITV said the VOD ad was given a rating by Clearcast which meant that it could not be shown before, during or after children's programmes and said the campaign was also targeted to the 16- to 37-year-old male audience and believed the programming around which the VOD ad was shown was a suitable context for this ad.
STV said these types of ads required careful scheduling and that it took the position that the restrictions on ads in broadcast media should similarly apply to VOD. They said that in this instance a post-9 pm restriction was applied which meant that it was only shown after the 9 pm watershed.
2. They said the game was launched on the XBox 360, PS3 and PC on 1 November 2013, on the XBox One on 22 November and on the PS4 on the 29 November. They said that whilst some of the ads were scheduled to appear around the Remembrance Sunday period, Clearcast were consulted throughout and did not raise any concerns.
Clearcast said that whilst it may have been the case that the ad was scheduled for broadcast on Remembrance Sunday, the specific date on which an ad was broadcast was not something over which that they had control.
3. They believed the ad did not show any disrespect to any soldier and in no way tried to denigrate the armed forces and stated that it was not the first TV ad showing war game footage. They reiterated that it was their intention to emphasise the fact that the game had 64 multi-player functionality and to communicate the chaotic nature of playing with that many people in the game.
Clearcast believed the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence to servicemen or their families.
Channel 4 said their policy was to pre-clear VOD ads through Clearcast and that in this case the ads were given a restriction which meant they were not shown in programmes commissioned for, principally directed at or likely to appeal to audiences below the age of 16 years. They said they therefore believed that the ad was appropriately restricted and served.
ITV said the VOD ad was given a rating by Clearcast which meant that it could not be shown before, during or after children's programmes and said the campaign was also targeted to the 16- to 37-year-old male audience and believed the programming around which the VOD ad was shown was a suitable context for this ad.
STV said these types of ads required careful scheduling and that it took the position that the restrictions on ads in broadcast media should similarly apply to VOD. They said that in this instance a post-9 pm restriction was applied which meant that was only shown after the 9 pm watershed.
4. They said the TV ad was given a timing restriction of post-7.30 pm to ensure that young children would not see it. They said the first burst of the campaign finished on 10 November and that those ads were programme-led so that they were specifically not broadcast next to programmes where those ads could be deemed to be inappropriate or in bad taste (such as serious or topically related programmes relating to Remembrance Sunday). They said that because the game itself was rated PEGI 18, it meant that it could not be shown before 7.30 pm. They also said the ad was not broadcast around any programmes directed or targeted at children and that the broadcaster did not allow this type of ad to be shown around programmes which carried a high index of children.
Clearcast said the TV ad was given an Ex-kids restriction meaning it would be kept away from children's programming. They said they also understood that the advertisers had imposed their own restriction meaning that the ads would not be broadcast before 7.30 pm.
Assessment
1. Not upheld
The ASA noted EA's intention was to draw attention to the multi-player functionality. However, we noted that although website ad (c) included several references to "multi-player", TV ad (a) and VOD ad (b) made no clear reference to that functionality. We considered that consumers would understand from the text in ad (c) and the voice-over in ads (a) and (b) (both the words and the way in which they were delivered by the actor with a sense of thrill), alongside the images of footage from the game which included tanks, shooting and explosions both on the battlefield and city streets, that 'playing at war' through the game was exciting and thrilling. Although we understood some consumers would find the voice-over "the glorious mind-blowing freedom of all out war" in ads (a) and (b) and the text "Witness the glorious chaos of all-out war" in ad (c) to be distasteful and upsetting, we considered that within the context of the ads in their entirety, those claims would be understood by consumers to be in reference to game-play and not to war itself. We therefore concluded that the ads were not likely to cause serious or widespread offence
On this point we investigated TV ad (a) 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), 4.2 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. and 4.9 4.9 Advertisements must not condone or encourage violence, crime, disorder or anti-social behaviour. (Harm and offence) but did not find it in breach.
On this point we investigated VOD ad (b) and website ad (c) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
4.1
4.1
Marketing communications must not contain anything that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care must be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age. Compliance will be judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards.
Marketing communications may be distasteful without necessarily breaching this rule. Marketers are urged to consider public sensitivities before using potentially offensive material.
The fact that a product is offensive to some people is not grounds for finding a marketing communication in breach of the Code.
and
4.4
4.4
Marketing communications must contain nothing that is likely to condone or encourage violence or anti-social behaviour.
(Harm and offence) but did not find them in breach.
2. Not upheld
We noted that some complainants had seen ad (a) on or around Remembrance Sunday but noted no specific complaints were received about the ad being broadcast around programmes specifically dedicated to Remembrance Sunday . Although we understood some consumers found the timing to be distasteful, we considered that the ad would be understood to be about game-play and not war itself and that the broadcast of the ad campaign around this time was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.
On this point we investigated ad (a) under BCAP Code rule 32.1 32.1 Broadcasters must exercise responsible judgement on the scheduling of advertisements and operate internal systems capable of identifying and avoiding unsuitable juxtapositions between advertising material and programmes, especially those that could distress or offend viewers or listeners. (Scheduling) but did not find it in breach.
3. Not upheld
Although we understood some consumers, including servicemen and women and their families (along with ex-members of the armed forces) may have found the voice-over "the glorious mind-blowing freedom of all out war" in ads (a) and (b) and the text "Witness the glorious chaos of all-out war" in ad (c) to be distasteful and upsetting, we considered that within the context of the ads in their entirety, those claims would be understood to be reference to game-play and not to war itself. We therefore concluded that the ads were not likely to cause serious or widespread offence and that they were not disrespectful to those who had directly experienced or been directly or indirectly affected by war.
On this point we investigated TV ad (a) 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), 4.2 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. and 4.9 4.9 Advertisements must not condone or encourage violence, crime, disorder or anti-social behaviour. (Harm and offence) but did not find it in breach.
On this point we investigated VOD ad (b) and website ad (c) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
4.1
4.1
Marketing communications must not contain anything that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care must be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age. Compliance will be judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards.
Marketing communications may be distasteful without necessarily breaching this rule. Marketers are urged to consider public sensitivities before using potentially offensive material.
The fact that a product is offensive to some people is not grounds for finding a marketing communication in breach of the Code.
and
4.4
4.4
Marketing communications must contain nothing that is likely to condone or encourage violence or anti-social behaviour.
(Harm and offence) but did not find them in breach.
4. Not upheld
We noted the ad was given an Ex-kids restriction meaning that it was not broadcast around programmes that were directly targeted at young children. We also noted EA's media buying agency only bought advertising space after 19.30 because the game itself had an PEGI 18 rating. Although we understood some viewers would be concerned that older children may have seen the ad if watching after 19.30, we considered there was nothing within the content of the ad that made it unsuitable for older children and noted the featured game-play did not include footage which directly reflected the given PEGI rating. We therefore considered that the given ex-kids restriction was sufficient. We concluded that ad (a) did not breach the Code.
On this point we investigated ad (a) under BCAP Code rule 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) but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action required.
