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.
The Code states “Marketing communications must neither link alcohol with seduction, sexual activity or sexual success nor imply that alcohol can enhance attractiveness… [and] must not imply that drinking alcohol is a key component of the success of a personal relationship or social event. The consumption of alcohol may be portrayed as sociable or thirst-quenching” (Rules 18.5 and 18.3).
Marketers often require guidance on the interpretation of rule 18.5. As always, much will depend on the execution but marketers should bear these in mind:
i) does the alcohol, implicitly or explicitly, make one or more characters in the ad more sexually attractive?
ii) does the alcohol seem to improve sexual activity in some way?
iii) does the alcohol seem to play a role in sex, for example, by being linked, implicitly or explicitly, with foreplay or sexual intimacy?
iv) does the alcohol seem key to sexual success, for example by removing inhibitions?
v) does the advertisement hint at sexual reward or promiscuity?
vi) does the advertisement link the alcohol with sexual behaviour?
If the answer to any of those questions is ''yes'', marketers might have to think again and revise the ad both to make sure it does not break the Code and to ensure it is in tune with society's present ideas of responsible alcohol advertising.
The ASA has decided that strong sexual images in advertisements for alcoholic drinks can breach the Code even if nothing directly suggests that the drink enhances the drinker’s sexual capabilities (Diageo Great Britain Ltd, 21 January 2004). When judging a poster for a product called ‘Stiffys Shots’, the ASA ruled that the name of the product could imply enhanced sexual performance; that is a tougher stance than in previous years when, for instance, it ruled that the name ‘Shag’ lager did not breach the Code (Stiffys Shots Ltd, 21 January 2004, and Spirit, Hop & Grape Company Ltd, 17 October 2001).
More recently, the ASA ruled that an ad that featured a photo of a stereotypical ‘buxom wench’, with the line "I love a good session on the Bishops Finger" played on the connotations of drinking and sexual activity. The ASA considered that the woman's pose was suggestive and concluded that, in combination with the text, it was likely to be seen as linking alcohol with seduction and sexual activity (Shepherd Neame Ltd, 25 October 2006).
The ASA ruled, however, that a ''Blankety-Blank'' style poster that had a pack shot and the claim "She’s always blowing XXX at Christmas" had not broken the alcohol rules. The ASA considered that readers were not likely to infer that the poster alluded to fellatio and a loss of inhibitions attributed to excessive consumption and, on balance, considered that it did not breach the Code. (Beverage Brands (UK) Ltd, 17 March 2004). In 2005, the ASA allowed an Absinthe 69 ad that showed two women draped across a man in the back of what looked like a taxi. The ASA considered that, because the ad appeared only in the trade press, it did not breach the Code (Wine & Spirit International Ltd, 6 July 2005). The decision might have been different if the ad had appeared in consumer media.
The Code prohibits marketers from portraying alcohol as enhancing popularity or being a reason for the success of a personal relationship. In 2000, the ASA upheld complaints about an ad that stated “A bottle of champagne before breakfast did wonders for our love life” (First Quench, May 2000). But more recently, the ASA rejected complaints that Moet & Chandon ads, which showed a photo of an obviously confident woman wearing a cocktail dress with the lines "LIVE LIFE ON CENTRE STAGE. BE FABULOUS*" and "EVERY GIRL NEEDS A FEW LOYAL SUBJECTS. BE FABULOUS*". Although the ads arguably implied that the young woman looked to be confident as a result of consuming the product (perhaps because she had lost her inhibitions), the ASA gave due consideration to the likely target audience and considered that the ads did not imply the drink enhanced confidence (Moet & Hennessy UK Ltd, 12 April 2006).
Last modified : 26 July 2010