Download “HUNKY DORY” FOR HUNKY DORY CRISPS By

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
EVERYTHING IS NOT “HUNKY DORY” FOR HUNKY DORY CRISPS
By: Duncan Grehan & Conor Griffin, Duncan Grehan & Partners, Solicitors
An advertising campaign for Hunky Dory’s crisps (otherwise internationally known as
“potato chips”) which featured women in revealing clothes playing rugby with taglines
such as “are you staring at my crisps” attracted a large number of complaints to the
Advertising Standards Authority of Ireland in May 2010. Each advertisement also featured
a second tag line which states “proud sponsors of Irish rugby”.
The ASAI received over 300 complaints in the days after the billboard campaign
commenced. The complainants generally felt that the campaign was offensive,
exploitative, tasteless, degrading and sexist towards women. In addition there were
complaints that such advertisements bring advertising into disrepute. Complainants
include the National Women’s Council, the Rape Crisis Centre and the Union of Students
in Ireland. The ASAI adopted an initial fast track procedure because of the volume of
complaints which seemed to indicate the campaign was causing widespread offence. They
ordered that on an interim basis the advertisements be withdrawn pending a full
investigation and decision. The advertiser accepted this and the advertisements were
withdrawn within 3 business days of the request.
Separately the Irish Rugby Football Union (IRFU) released a statement in the Irish media
indicating that its solicitors had contacted the advertiser directly arising from the claim
“proud sponsors of Irish rugby”. It stated that the claim implied that the advertiser was a
significant sponsor of the sport in Ireland even though the IRFU had no involvement with
the advertiser. The implication was that this was ambush marketing and capitalising on the
popularity or rugby in Ireland. The advertiser’s response to this was that it sponsored the
Navan Rugby Team, a team which plays in Division 3 of the Irish League and was
therefore perfectly entitled to state that it is a sponsor of Irish rugby even if its sponsorship
was of a lower league, amateur level team.
Ultimately the ASAI Complaints Committee assessed all of the complaints received and
the response of the advertisers. The advertisers had addressed the various points in the
complaints and felt that this was a campaign which was meant to be entertaining and had
received widespread support from the public in the media. They produced emails of
support received from members of the public. They said that the images were of women in
sport and not intended to cause offence or condone dangerous behaviour. However having
regard to the volume of complaints received the Complaints Committee concluded that the
advertisers were in breach of the Code and the advertisements should be permanently
withdrawn from all media to include the advertisers own website.
As the advertisements were withdrawn so promptly the more interesting issue of the claim
“proud sponsors or Irish rugby” between the IRFU and the advertiser was we suspect not
taken any further. The campaign is an interesting Irish example of how ambush marketing
can generate maximum exposure at a relatively low cost.