ASA Adjudication on Department of Health t/a East & West Midlands Regional Tobacco Group

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found no violation of the country’s advertising code for a campaign by East & West Midlands Tobacco Group about the dangers of buying “dodgy” (i.e., smuggled) cigarettes. The campaign included two posters and a leaflet with a picture of a rat’s tail with the text “Dodgy cigs may contain rodent dropping, bugs and dirt.” The ASA found that any distress caused by the unpleasant imagery in the campaign was outweighed by the risk of using illicit tobacco. As a result, the campaign did not violate the advertising codes related to responsible advertising, decency, or fear and distress.

ASA Adjudication on Department of Health t/a East and West Midlands Regional Tobacco Group, Complaint Ref. 93902 (2009).

  • United Kingdom
  • Sep 30, 2009
  • Advertising Standards Authority
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff Department of Health

Defendant East & West Midlands Regional Tobacco Group

Legislation Cited

Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code, Clause 2.2 (Responsible Advertising)

Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code, Clause 5.1 and 5.2 (Decency)

Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code, Clause 9.1 and 9.2 (Fear and Distress)

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product

None

"We understood that the leaflet was inserted into newspapers delivered to targeted postal sectors which had high indexes of routine and manual workers, amongst whom the incidence of smoking was relatively high. We considered that reduced the likelihood of children and non-smokers seeing the graphic imagery. Although the leaflet's imagery was unpleasant, we were of the view that because it was targeted at adult smokers, any distress or disgust caused was less likely to be disproportionate to the risk of the recipient consuming illicit tobacco, and the hard-hitting approach was more likely to be considered justified by the target audience. On this point, we investigated ad (c) under CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Responsible advertising), 5.1 and 5.2 (Decency) and 9.1 and 9.2 (Fear and distress) but did not find it in breach."
"The ASA welcomed EWMRTG's efforts to place the posters specifically in areas where the number of smokers and illicit tobacco sales were likely to be high, although we considered that would not prevent people outside the target audience seeing the ads. Nevertheless, we considered that although the posters' imagery was likely to be seen as graphic and distasteful, it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence, especially because of the serious message it carried: the danger of illicit tobacco and the need to give up smoking. We considered that some children were initially likely to find the strong images unsettling, but because they merely showed shock and surprise on the faces of the smokers and did not depict the infliction of pain, and showed tasteless but not violent images, children were unlikely to find them distressing. We concluded that the posters were suitable for public display. On this point, we investigated ads (a) and (b) under CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Responsible advertising), 5.1 and 5.2 (Decency) and 9.1 and 9.2 (Fear and distress) but did not find them in breach."