Complaint: 17/116

SAFE Television

Details

Complainants
D. Turner
advertisers
SAFE Save Animals From Exploitation
Year
2017
Media
Television
Product
Advocacy
Clauses
Decision
No Grounds to Proceed
ASA Links
Website Listing
Decision Document

Document

2017_11600.png

COMPLAINT NUMBER 17/116

COMPLAINANT D Turner

ADVERTISER SAFE Save Animals From

Exploitation

ADVERTISEMENT SAFE Television

DATE OF MEETING 18 April 2017

OUTCOME No Grounds to Proceed


Advertisement: The Safe Animals from Exploitation (SAFE) Television advertisement

'Please don't buy caged eggs' shows a woman having flashbacks of caged hens living in crowded conditions while shopping for eggs in a supermarket.

The Chair ruled there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed. Complainant, D Turner, said:

The reasons that I found this programme breached the standards:

This advt was in conjunction with caged chickens. It portrays that seemingly all chickens unless free range are from situations as shown. This is not the case. Many chicken

farmers have spent thousands of dollars on housing their chickens and to be honest i for one would like to enter this world as one who gets feed grains etc regularly, has a constant

supply of water, have waste taken away and to live in an air conditioned enviroment! What this advt implies is not right.

The relevant provisions were Code of Ethics - Basic Principle 4, Rule 11, Rule 2.

The Chair noted the Complainant's concern that the advertisement implied all non free- range chickens are kept in poor conditions and this was misleading

The Chair noted that the subject of the advertisement was 'caged eggs' and it was aimed at that specific category of egg production.

The Chair confirmed the advertisement for SAFE was an advocacy advertisement intended to raise awareness about SAFE's view of the overcrowded conditions for caged hens. The Chair acknowledged these images can be confronting, however, advocacy advertising is provided for under Rule 11 of the Code of Ethics. A robust expression of opinion is allowed as long as the advertiser is clearly identified.

The Chair said the advertisement had been prepared with a due sense of social responsibility to consumers and there was no apparent breach of the Code of Ethics

Accordingly, the Chair ruled there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed.

Chai r' s Ruling: Complaint No Grounds to Proceed