Complaint: 17/132

Burger Fuel Digital Marketing

Details

Complainants
advertisers
BurgerFuel
Year
2017
Media
Product
Food and Beverage
Clauses
Decision
No Grounds to Proceed
ASA Links
Website Listing
Decision Document

Document

2017_13200.png

COMPLAINT NUMBER 17/132

COMPLAINANT S Petley

ADVERTISER Burger Fuel ADVERTISEMENT Burger Fuel Digital Marketing DATE OF MEETING 26 April 2017

OUTCOME No Grounds to Proceed


Advertisement: The Burger Fuel email advertisement depicted an image of the Da Vinci Last Supper painting with Burger Fuel products superimposed into the picture. It also has a modern day photo recreating the original painting

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

Complainant, S Petley, said: I was sent an eDM today (Good Friday) from Burger Fuel. The images (as attached) are clearly mocking Jesus Christ's last super prior to his crucifixion. Whether you believe in Jesus Christ or not, I believe that it's downright disrespectful and no doubt other Christians (and other people with a respectful bone in their body) would have been offended by this. It's not clever or funny and in my opinion is a failed attempted at contextual marketing. How embarrassing.

The relevant provisions were Code of Ethics - Basic Principle 4; Code for People in

Advertising - Basic Principle 3, Basic Principle 6.

The Chair noted the Complainant's concerns that the advertisement, depicting the Last

Supper with burgers was disrespectful to Christians.

The Chair took into account that the Advertiser sought to use light-hearted humour to connect its product with Easter celebrations. While this was offensive to the Complainant, the Chair confirmed that humour and satire were permissible under the Advertising Codes. The Chair's view was that the advertisement did not reach the threshold to be considered a breach of the Code of Ethics or the Code for People in Advertising.

Therefore the Chair ruled the advertisement had been prepared with a due sense of social responsibility to consumers and there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed.

Chai r' s Ruling: Complaint No Grounds to Proceed