“Legal, decent, honest and truthful” could almost be a definition of corporate responsibility, but suddenly it doesn’t seem sufficient for the advertising industry which it actually applies to. It begs a myriad questions, because like a lot of CSR it applies to how companies do things, not what they do. It says nothing, for example, about advertising alcohol or tobacco, promoting unhealthy food to children, medicines to people who might be better advised not to use them, or fast cars that will speed climate change.
Of course there are specific codes for the most sensitive product areas, such as alcohol, and sectors from the drinks industry to banking have developed their own voluntary codes of conduct. But as with most areas of corporate responsibility, the highly sensitive products and services are probably the least of the problem for both the companies selling them and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), whose remit has recently been extended to cover TV advertising as well as its traditional media beat.
The ASA’s code of practice specifically identifies “responsibility to consumers and to society”. In a recent speech to the Westminster Media Forum, the ASA’s director-general, Chris Graham, clarified the regulator’s position: “ethical communications should be part of any CSR checklis…CSR raises the stakes.”
He made the case for the ASA to police the industry, but made clear it was in “good cop” mode: “more community policing, working with the grain of the advertising business.”
This assumes that advertisers and their agencies can make the leap from being legal, decent, honest and truthful in the way they advertise, to being responsible in what they advertise beyond the narrowly restricted product categories (eg tobacco and guns).
On the whole, the industry is pretty good at complying with the rules. The ASA might be getting more and more complaints each year, but even last year’s 3,707 is pretty puny in the context of the thousands of ads which appear in the papers and on hoardings. And many complaints are about decency rather than the other three elements – good examples being the bare bottoms which featured in the Velvet toilet paper ads, and the shocking pictures of babies in Barnardo’s Silver Spoon campaign (which many would probably regard as highly “responsible”).
But the thing is, so far as most people are concerned, advertising is about “selling more stuff”, which immediately raises alarms about the notion of sustainable consumption.
Ad people are usually rather torn about this. Drink and tobacco advertisers always argue, for example, that they are looking for brand switching, not growing the market. But there does seem to be an element of doublethink at work. For example, the TV code on advertising to children says: “advertisements must not directly advise or ask children to buy or to ask their parents or others to make enquiries or purchases.”
If ads are not intended to get people to buy the products, it’s hard to see what they are on air for. That is what “the grain of the business” is about. So it is hard to see how working with the grain of the industry can address difficult issues such as advertising
EXISTING GUIDELINES
ASA key principles:
all marketing communications should be legal, decent, honest and truthful
all marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society
COMMENTS