Complaint: 17/227

Mars NZL Ltd, Television

Details

Complainants
advertisers
Mars NZL Ltd
Year
2017
Media
Television
Product
Household Goods
Clauses
Decision
No Grounds to Proceed
ASA Links
Website Listing
Decision Document

Document





COMPLAINT NUMBER
17/227
COMPLAINANT
H Burdus
ADVERTISER
Mars NZL Ltd
ADVERTISEMENT
Mars NZL Ltd, Television
DATE OF MEETING
17 July 2017
OUTCOME
No Grounds to Proceed


Advertisement:
The television advertisement for Mars the My Dog pet food product shows
a security guard in a boardroom office environment setting, unpacking his lunch and sitting
on a window ledge to eat it. He also unpacks a can of dog food which he feeds to the dog
who is standing on a window vent.

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

Complainant,
H Burdus, said: My complaint refers to an advertisement for MY DOG
petfood. It has screened many times but most recently at 6.30, Friday 30th June 2017, on
TV ONE in the ONE news ad break.

It shows a man finishing his lunch in what appears to be a work cafeteria. He has
"SECURITY" emblazoned on his right shoulder/upper arm. His little dog reminds him so an
opened tin of product is on the bench / table top. the Dog jumps up there to eat.
Dogs (and cats) ought to be feed off the floor. NOT WHERE OTHER PEOPLE will be putting
their own food.
I believe this is a very bad example to viewers.

The relevant provisions were Code of Ethics - Basic Principle 4, Rule 12.

The Acting Chair noted the Complainant's concern that it was unhygienic to be feeding
animals on a surface that people prepare food on.

The Acting Chair reviewed the advertisement and confirmed that it was window vent, rather
than a food surface, being used to feed the animal from.

While acknowledging the concern the Complainant raised, and the view it was a bench top
setting, the Acting Chair said in its actual context, the advertisement had been prepared with
a due sense of social responsibility and did not reach the threshold to breach the safety
requirements of the code.

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


Acting Chair's Ruling: Complaint No Grounds to Proceed