Our Code says that ads should contain nothing that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. The ASA bases its judgments on the content of the ad and the medium, audience, product type and prevailing standards in society.

Complaints about offence often require difficult judgements but we don’t intervene where advertising is simply criticised for being in poor taste. Apart from freedom of speech considerations, even well-intentioned and thoughtful people will have different and sometimes contradictory opinions about what constitutes ‘bad taste’ or should be prohibited. We can only act if the ad, in our judgement, offends against widely accepted moral, social or cultural standards.

Whilst the ASA Council understood the concerns of Tiga and those complainants who worked in the video games industry, it noted that the ad did not claim that playing computer or console games alone would lead to illness or premature death. The Council considered that most readers would understand that the ad was discouraging a sedentary lifestyle and used the example of playing a console game as an illustration of the type of behaviour which might lead to long-term health problems if no exercise were taken alongside more sedentary activities. The Council considered it unlikely that most readers would infer from the ad that playing video games was the sole contributory factor in the development of the health problems mentioned in the ad. The Council concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence or mislead for those reasons, or likely to be seen as unfairly targeting or denigrating the video games industry.

The Council also noted that the ad did not imply that children should not play video games at all, or that some games would not be beneficial for educational or cognitive development. We also noted that the ad advised parents to ensure their children were physically active for at least one hour every day. The Council considered that most readers were unlikely to interpret the ad to mean that video games could not be played or enjoyed as part of a healthy lifestyle. The Council did not consider the ad likely to mislead readers about the benefits of some video games towards fitness and cognitive development in children or to cause offence for that reason.

One parent objected that the ad was offensive and harmful because it frightened her young child who became scared that she would die if she played video games. The ASA Council sympathised with those concerns and understood that the reference to future health might, for some, be upsetting. However, it considered that the ad was unlikely to cause undue fear or distress to parents or children.

best regards and thanks for your very interesting and helpful blog. RB

If you read this you will see that the 3 Charities/ The Gate campaign is completely different and in fact breaks the Department of Health guidelines for it’s campaign. See pages 25 and 26.

a) Online to the Advertising Standards Authority -
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/how_to_complain/complaints_form/

b) Phoning Change4life directly – 0300 123 4567

c) Department of Health – Email Chief Medical Officer: CMOweb@dh.gsi.gov.uk

d) Alan Johnson MP – Secretary of State for Health: johnsona@parliament.uk

e) Dawn Primarolo MP – who has spoken at length about the campaign: MSPHtemp@dh.gsi.gov.uk or dhmail@dh.gsi.gov.uk

f) Email Diabetes UK this email – info@diabetes.org.uk

g) Your own MP – Write to Them – http://www.writetothem.com/

h) You can leave comments on DUK’s face book wall. http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=20583485166&topic=6289