In recent weeks, many right-thinking South Africans have begun to wonder if, as a country, we may have our priorities wrong. Thousands march about the president's penis, but child rape and lack of jobs and education seem to cause little more than a ripple on our radars. (video)
And now, suddenly, the SABC has decided that it should pull ads off its own bat, and has disallowed a Nando's ad, it seems, on the basis that it promotes xenophobia and violence and has bad language.
But if the SABC has decided that it is an expert in the code, then it should never have run that commercial. So its sudden interest in the content of this commercial makes me think that the president's penis looms large in its mind.
But back to the xenophobia ad.
The Code of Advertising Practice states that any advertising must be considered as a whole, and in the context of surrounding circumstances. And, really, the ad as a whole is anti-xenophobia, not pro.
But maybe the people at the SABC are so blinded by penises that they can't actually see the ad properly. And my Khoi-san is not good enough to tell exactly how bad a bad word was uttered, but I don't think that the little string of icons is the worst word ever used in advertising history. A quick search of the ASA's previous rulings shows many a case where the "f" word has been strongly implied in advertising, without the SABC batting an eyelid.
And then there is Nando's response to the issue, as reported by the Sunday Times, in which it states that the ASA has assured it that the commercial is not in breach of any code.
I can assure Nando's that the ASA did not say any such thing, as the ASA refuses to pre-clear any advertising because it would then be conflicted if it got a complaint. What might have happened is that the ACA (the Association of Communication and Advertising) gave a pre-publication opinion which is not binding on the ASA.
Totally different concern
If anyone had asked my opinion - which, alas, they did not - I would have raised a totally different concern: the portrayal of the Khoi-san man. As Kulula discovered in 2005 when it used a spoof of the movie "The Gods Must Be Crazy", the remaining Khoi-san people in South Africa are very sensitive. Had the ad run, I think that they would have been the source of the complaints.
Either way - never mind the gods - I am starting to wonder if not only the people of South Africa, but the SABC - are crazy...
So it was with some relief that I have just seen that we are not the only country that is totally insane when it comes to what gets us riled.
Most complained about in the UK
The most-complained-about advertisement in the entire history of the UK ASA has recently been revealed by Marketing Week to be a KFC commercial where complainants got wound up because... wait for it... the characters are talking with their mouths full!
The ad attracted 1671 complaints, but the UK ASA held that the ad could keep flighting. Maybe someone should tell them to have a march?
Most complained about in SA
It is interesting to compare this to our own ASA where, to the best of my knowledge, the most-complained-about-ad ever is still the Virgin Mobile commercial, showing a chap dying and going to heaven. When he gets there, he is sent back home because he's still tied to his cellphone contract.
Over 2000 angry Christians took offence at the portrayal of heaven. The ASA held that the ad was acceptable, on the basis that it made no reference to Christianity, and that in any event, Christians do not have a monopoly on heaven. What is particularly interesting is that, with 2000 complaints, this beats the UK's most-complained-about ad - and may in fact be a world record. Proudly South African complainers?
And during 2011 in the UK, as reported recently by Marketing Week, 659 consumers complained about a rather spooky girl in a Phones 4 U commercial but, again, the complaint was dismissed.
[PS In my next article, I vow not to use the word "penis" even once. The SABC might start censoring me.]
Gail Schimmel is a specialist in advertising law. She runs a consultancy - Clear Copy (www.clearcopy.co.za) - that offers advice to marketers and advertisers in relation to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and other aspects of advertising law. An admitted attorney (with BA, LLB, Psychology Honours and LLM degrees), she was previously head of legal and regulatory at the ASA, and subsequently joined Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs as a director in 2008. Email and follow @GailSchimmel.
Your the BOSS!... If only people would start looking at what is real and what is not in life. They might just get somewhere. And you would think after 19 years of this Goverments promises, lies, stealing and tourtouring their own people. There people would wake up and look into the faces of new people to guide them, or step up stand together and push those who are doing them harm out. Instead of Marching for nothing really meaningfull. Like really is that painting going to feed them tomorrow? Or Build them a house that will stay standing up when it rains? OR give them water from the tap? OR Electricity to light up the room to read at night or cook? OR schools to teach our children? OR Hospitals to help the hurt? OR WE can go on and on.........Promises! Promises!....never kept..But yet they still follow my leader.....who only thinks of a stupid painting that is just that. A stupid Painting. an an ad on TV is just an AD that say GO BUY CHICKEN AT NANDOS IN A FUNNY WAY. What you see and hear on ads people are just that ADS for you to go buy things.... don't read anything else into it. Becase their are more important things in life worth fighting for like your LIFE! Posted on 5 Jun 2012 17:34
You are very very angry on behalf of the 'disenfranchised' shaz. Quite comical actually. What is genuine in your rant is your complete lack of understanding - I can see you really don't understand why these people vote the way they do time and time again. Instead of reverting to the usual unsubstantiated assumptions around a lack of education - i suggest a week with 'these people'. it might help, just a thought Posted on 11 Jun 2012 11:54
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Message Board accepts no liability of legal consequences that arise from the Message Boards (e.g. defamation, slander, or other such crimes). All posted messages are the sole property of their respective authors. The maintainer does retain the right to remove any message posts for whatever reasons. People that post messages to this forum are not to libel/slander nor in any other way depict a company, entity, individual(s), or service in a false light; should they do so, the legal consequences are theirs alone. Bizcommunity.com will disclose authors' IP addresses to authorities if compelled to do so by a court of law.