Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
Marketers should be aware of the potential to cause serious or widespread offence when referring to different races, cultures, nationalities or ethnic groups. Light-hearted ads might be acceptable but even mild humour revolving around racial stereotypes has the potential to seriously offend. Marketers should therefore consider carefully the likely acceptability of their intended approach. The tone of the marketing communication is extremely important: aggressive, confrontational or non-humorous approaches are likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Marcoms seen to condone violence or intolerance towards an ethnic group could breach the Code by causing offence, being socially irresponsible or by provoking or condoning violence and anti-social behaviour.
Generalisations that do not mention specific nationalities or racial groups can offend. The ASA upheld complaints about a business fax that was headlined “Asylum Seekers” and stated ”Are the French Authorities doing enough to stop the 200,000 illegals entering the UK every year …?”. It considered that, because the figures were unsubstantiated, the fax implied all asylum seekers were illegal and was likely to be interpreted as racist (21st Century Faxes Ltd, 16 January 2002). But, in 2007, the ASA rejected an ad that claimed “A migrant a minute is entering Britain … Without a debate or vote in Parliament, our elected MPs have handed control of our borders to the European Union, allowing unlimited immigration into Britain from EU Countries. 88% of you, the people, want a vote on getting your borders back. Write to your MP and demand a referendum NOW …”. The ASA noted the ad did not mention race and was not inflammatory in tone. It considered that readers would understand that the advertiser was merely expressing an opinion (The Speak Out Campaign Ltd, 24 October 2007). It took a similar line on a long-running campaign that claimed “The idea of multiculturalism has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. We speak ENGLISH, not Indian, Urdu, Arabic, Chinese or any other language … I highly encourage you to take advantage of one other great British freedom, the right to leave …” (Charles Robertson (Developments) Ltd, 19 July 2006).
In 2006, a TV channel poster that stated "NOTHING GOOD EVER CAME OUT OF AMERICA" provoked complaints that it was offensive and racist to Americans; the ads were a precursor to follow-up posters that stated "Who says nothing good ever came out of America. The new channel from Five showcasing the best of the US". The ASA considered, however, that the ad did not refer to a specific ethnic group, that the phrase was not an obvious racial insult and that the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence (Channel 5 Broadcasting Limited t/a five US, 6 December 2006).
Light-hearted humorous approaches are often acceptable but sometimes the impact is hard to predict and marketers can get it very wrong. The ASA received and rejected a complaint about an ad that claimed “The Irish Strippers will not be performing due to the hot weather“ (The Lord Napier, 24 August 2005) but received over 500 complaints about a TV and cinema campaign for a chewing gum. The campaign, which used a stereotype of a black Caribbean man talking in dub poetry, was found to humiliate, insult and depict black or Caribbean people in a negative way (Cadbury Trebor Bassett Services Ltd, 28 March 2007). A complaint was received about a Twining teas television ad that the complainant felt portrayed a negative racial stereotype of a black man as sexually promiscuous and there to provide sexual services for white women. The ASA did not uphold this complaint as although it acknowledged the innuendo featured was mildly sexual, it did not consider that it was reliant on the young man’s ethnic origins or a racial stereotype and was therefore deemed not to be offensive in the manner implied (R Twining, 26th March 2008).
Whether they are intended to be humorous or not, some ads are just ill-judged. In 2004, one marketer superimposed a gorilla’s face over a picture of a black woman and, not surprisingly, was considered to have caused serious or widespread offence (Onetoo Ltd, 28 January 2004).
Non-commercial bodies should pay as much attention to the depiction of race in their advertisements as commercial marketers. A Metropolitan Police recruitment advertisement that complainants thought implied black people were less interested than white people in law enforcement and crime prevention was judged by the ASA to be unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence; the ASA concluded that the choice of people used in the advertisements was not racist (Metropolitan Police, 28 March 2000). The ASA did, however, uphold complaints about a Commission for Racial Equality campaign that used a controversial way to address complacency about racism; the ASA ruled that, the marketers’ intentions notwithstanding, the teaser posters were likely to cause serious or widespread offence (Commission for Racial Equality, November 1998).
Marketers should remember that society’s tolerance changes over time and can sometimes be influenced by events outside their control, such as current affairs.
See 'Taste and Decency: General’, ‘Taste and Decency: Stereotypes’, and 'Social Responsibility'.
Last modified : 08 February 2012