ASA rulings on gender stereotypes, sexualisation and objectification in ads

In a series of recent rulings, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has reviewed ads which were purported to include gender stereotypes, sexualisation and objectification in breach of the relevant rules in the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing (CAP Code) and the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising (BCAP Code) and accompanying ASA guidance. A key aim of these rules is to prevent gender stereotypes that can negatively reinforce how people think men or women should behave.

 Key Rules

The following rules are a key part of the ASA's effort to regulate advertisements in respect of gender.

• CAP Code rule 4.9 and BCAP Code rule 4.14: prohibits advertisements from including "gender stereotypes likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offence" (rules introduced on 14 June 2019 following a review of gender stereotyping in advertisements by the ASA);
• CAP Code rule 4.1: prohibits "anything that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence";
• CAP Code rule 4.8: prohibits the portrayal or representation of "anyone who is, or seems to be, under 18 in a sexual way"; and
• CAP Code rule 1.3: states that marketing communications must "be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and society".

Recent Rulings

The interpretation of these rules is further clarified in the ASA's recent rulings:

• Advertisements by brands including, Brightika Inc, Gamehaus Network Technology, Oasis Games and Higgs Technology portrayed female characters in a manner associated with sexual connotations, often in a state of helplessness, and with the purpose of titillating viewers. The ASA found that these ads breached CAP Code rules 1.3, 4.1 and 4.9. Oasis Games were also in breach of CAP Code rule 4.8 for representing someone who seemed to be under 18 in a sexual way.
• An advertisement by Match.com was found to perpetuate negative gender stereotypes as the female character's gestures were indistinguishable from domestic chores. The ASA found that this ad breached CAP Code rules 1.3, 4.1 and 4.9.
• The ASA did not uphold a complaint against an advertisement by Toyota, which saw a female character provide a comically unrelated explanation of the advertised hybrid car. The ASA found that this ad did not breach BCAP Code rule 4.14.

Key Takeaways:

• CAP Code rules 1.3, 4.1 and 4.9 are breached when females are portrayed as stereotypical sexual objects, in a scenario that is designed to titillate viewers.
• A breach of CAP 4.8 extends to animations of anyone who is, or seems to be, under 18. The placement of cartoon-style features, such as a tail, will not mitigate against a breach.
• Advertisements may feature people undertaking gender-stereotypical roles, to the extent that they do not perpetuate negative gender stereotypes. For example, where a female character plays into a gender stereotype as a one-off or in such an absurd manner that it should be interpreted for comedic purposes.
• In contrast, an advertisement is likely to perpetuate negative gender stereotypes where it shows a female character performing domestic acts that are one-sided and regularly performed, especially where it suggests that females should be subservient to males in order to maintain a successful relationship.
• The wider context of the advertisement will be taken into consideration including the broadcasting method, the speech and the text. For example, radio advertisements may use a female voice to allow listeners to differentiate between characters.
• The recent rulings indicate a movement towards more stringent regulation of marketing tools, to ensure advertisers uphold their responsibilities and avoid the unwarranted use of gender stereotypes.

Key Considerations

Looking through the current consumer lens advertisements depicting male-female relationships and family life in previous decades would attract much controversy. Brands have had to move with the times and consider current public perception and attitudes which demands that ads should not negatively reinforce how people think a person of a particular gender should look and behave, which the rules and the ASA guidance seeks to reflect. Protecting women and girls against misogyny is also a particular area of focus for some proponents of the Online Safety Bill (the "OSB") which looks to address illegal and harmful content online by imposing a range of obligations on regulated service providers to keep children and adults safe online. The House of Lords recently debated the OSB at the second reading and commented on the importance of tackling misogyny which was described as "dangerous and totally unacceptable". Both the recent ASA rulings and the OSB seek to impose regulations and guidance to enforce protections against misogynistic content online, which will continue to evolve as the OSB progresses and comes into force.