A billboard advertisement for real estate developer Orchard Piper has had a complaint against it upheld by the Ad Standards Community Panel after it was found that sexually exploitative images used in the campaign breached the AANA Code of Ethics.
The billboard advertisement promoting a real estate development featured several images, including one of a woman leaning into a car with her skirt blown upwards and her sheer underpants visible. Several complaints were made against the ad, calling it sleazy, salacious and “clearly misogynistic”.
“This image clearly objectifies women as sexual objects of wealthy men,” on complainant said. “It does not belong on a billboard in this day and age. It belongs back in the dark ages of the ’70s where women were scantly clad and draped over luxury cars that clearly only men could afford”.
“As an early educator, I know that this image gives children a very warped view of gender roles in society. It is harmful, and I don’t know how it went from some thought bubble to a billboard. It should never have got past some man’s frontal lobe. To add insult to injury, they have plastered the image right next to a photo of a children’s toy store!” said another.
The property developers responded to the complaints, saying that the ad had been proactively taken down in response to feedback received, but also noted a number of calls, emails and messages from people questioning why the ad – depicting an iconic period of time for the area – was removed.
“Our vision for the precinct is that it will soon return to its former heights. Our intention with the photo wall was to present a depiction of Toorak Village through time, some of those images taken by one of the cities most renowned photographers of the era, Rennie Ellis. This was very much part of a coordinated campaign which sought to show the former glamour of Toorak Village in the 60s & 70s in particular,” the advertisers response detailed.
Upon investigation of the OOH campaign, the panel found that the advertisement did portray or depict material in a way that discriminates against or vilifies a person or section of the community on account of gender, did employ sexual appeal in a manner which is exploitative or degrading of an individual or group of people and did not treat sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience.
The panel upheld the complaints in violation of Sections 2.1, 2.2, and 2.4 of the AANA Code of Ethics.
Orchard Piper accepted the judgement, referencing their previous confirmation that the ad had already been removed.
The Climate Study Group has also found itself in hot water after The Australian shared a print advertisement featuring the headline “The carbon dioxide climate myth”.
“This fraudulent ad is indistinguishable from editorial content. However, the content of this ad is far from editorial. It’s a fringe conspiracy theory presenting false and misleading claims. It’s attempting to mislead viewers into believing that climate change is just a myth by making blatantly incorrect claims,” one complaint said.
The panel found that the advertisement was misleading, deceptive and likely to mislead or deceive and concluded that adequate evidence to back the claims had not been provided therefore concluding that it did breach the Environmental Code.
The advertiser agreed to discontinue the campaign.
