Submitted by Cedric Hughes on Mon, 10/22/2007 - 15:46
The Canadian Code of Advertising Standards, first published by Advertising Standards Canada (ASC) in 1963, and regularly updated to ensure it remains, “vital, relevant and current” contains two clauses most frequently cited in connection with complaints about motor vehicle advertising. The first, Clause 10 (Safety) states that:
Advertisements must not without reason,
justifiable on educational or social grounds,
display a disregard for safety by depicting
situations that might reasonably be
interpreted as encouraging unsafe or dangerous practices, or acts.”
The second, Clause 14 (Unacceptable Depictions and Portrayals) states that:
It is recognized that advertisements may be distasteful without necessarily conflicting
with the provision of this Clause 14; and the fact that a particular product or service
may be offensive to some people is not sufficient grounds for objecting to an
advertisement for the product or service.
Advertisements shall not: …
(b) appear in a realistic manner to… exhibit obvious indifference to, unlawful behaviour;
The Code is supplemented by Interpretation Guidelines to help industry and the public understand how these clauses are applied in adjudicating consumer complaints filed with ASC. Last year (2006), in response to automotive advertising having garnered, for the first time, the second highest number of complaints, the ASC issued an advisory with its year-end report to “help and encourage advertisers to develop creative and effective automobile advertising that also complies with the Code. This Advisory notes that in determining whether or not an ad contravenes Clause 10 the adjudicator asks the following:
- Whether depiction of the performance, power or acceleration of the vehicle conveys the impression that it is acceptable to exceed speed limits;
- Whether depiction of a vehicle’s handling ability involves potentially unsafe actions such as cutting in and out of traffic, excessively aggressive driving, or car chases in a residential setting;
- Whether the depiction appears realistic or unreal, as in a fantasy-like scenario that is unlikely to be copied or emulated in real life;
- Whether the depicted situation can be reasonably interpreted as condoning or encouraging unsafe driving practices; and
- Whether the ad contains disclaimer language sufficient to clarify or provide additional information relating to the main message but not contradicting it?
For more help with understanding how these Clauses are interpreted, the Advisory notes that summaries of upheld cases are reported in quarterly Ad Complaints Reports that are published online at www.adstandards.com.
The main complaint against ads that contravene these clauses is that they influence drivers, particularly young drivers, to copy what they are seeing. Additionally, the ASC noted that complainants found this “unsafe” messaging more prevalent to the point of becoming an unacceptable “standard” in automobile advertising.
Road Rules keeps an eye on car ads and has noted and encourages an increasing focus on safety and fuel economy features. But, that said, the performance and handling ads still have the edge. Maybe the time has come to end the “go faster” message altogether. After all, what new motor vehicles offered for sale in Canada today are not engineered to vastly exceed the legal limits in “zero to x seconds”?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
