Major UK supermarket launches TV ad with Greenpeace against the use of palm oil, but Clearcast bans it from airing


#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/11/09/major-uk-supermarket-creates-t.html


#2

is that an ad is prohibited if it is “directed towards a political end”

OMG how is “stop deforestation” a political end? How is even “palm oil is bad!” a political end?

This is Clearcast’s “shut up and dribble” moment.


#3

People watch TV? Just pop it online (as they did). Also banning it probably gave them way more exposure so… success?


#4

I’m pretty sure Clearcast have no legal standing when it comes to what is advertised, That would be the Advertising Standards Authority who could tell them to pull the ad. Clearcast advise their clients as to what they should do, they don’t have to do it. Clearly some ads get through as the ASA upholds complaints sometimes, those ads would have also been vetted before hand. Who’s going to object? Aldi should go forward and find out where the vested interests lie. The worse that can happen is that it gets pulled.


#5

Sure, let’s require ads to be morally meaningless- what’s the problem with that?


#6

We are in an age where “vaccines work” and “climate change is real” are considered political statements. “Stop deforestation” is clearly antibusiness, just as those are “liberal” statements. Actually, any proscience (it pains me more than you can know that this is even a word, let alone an identifiable political stance) statement will be interpreted as a “liberal political statement.” :persevere:


#7

On a bit of a tangent, I always think it’s interesting that Iceland (the shop) ended up being owned by Iceland (the country).

Back in the 2000s, the chain of shops was bought over by Baugur, an Icelandic investment company. When Baugur collapsed, the ownership of the shop passed to Baugur’s creditors- the Icelandic banks Landsbanki and Glitnir. In the 2008 financial crisis, both of these banks failed and passed into the ownership of the Icelandic government, and thus, Iceland acquired Iceland.

This also meant that due to a long -running trademark dispute between Iceland (the country) and Iceland(the shop) over the trademark to the name “Iceland”, the Icelandic government was technically in dispute with itself.


#8

You’re right - they don’t have legal force. They can pronounce on whether an ad will fall foul of the CAP and BCAP guidelines and perhaps that’s why it isn’t being shown. If I were Iceland, I’d run it, and even if the ASA eventually ruled againt it, the campaign would have reached millions and, such is the prolonged process, long been superceded by new advertising.


#9

On the plus side, now it’s banned, everyone will watch it rather than mentally tune out.


#10

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.