OnlyFans model Emily Rose has been spanked by the ad watchdog over a raunchy poster showing her posing in underwear, despite an almost identical campaign from Eliza Rose Watson, which attracted more complaints but was cleared last summer.
The campaign for the model, who goes by the name ‘Emrosebydark’, sparked 12 complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority, including one from the London Borough of Haringey.
Some of the complainants, who believed the ad was overly sexualised and objectified women, challenged whether it was offensive or harmful.
However, all of the complainants, who understood that OnlyFans was an online subscription service featuring sexual adult content, were concerned that the ad was displayed in close proximity to a youth centre, milkshake shop, schools and a roller-skating rink. They challenged whether it was inappropriate for display in an untargeted medium where children could see it.
In response to the ASA investigation, Emily Rose said she had developed the ad with the sensibilities of potential audiences in mind. She believed it adhered to established advertising guidelines and reflected trends observed in leading brands.
She considered that the image used was not suggestive or harmful, and believed it to be less provocative than mainstream ads for lingerie or perfume. Rose said the ad deliberately omitted any call to action.
Rose insisted the ad would not appeal to children because it did not feature bright colours, engaging slogans, fun elements or QR codes. She sent figures from her social media channel that showed her audience was primarily in the 25-44 age bracket.
She understood that ads could be distasteful without causing serious or widespread offence under the Code, and the fact that that a product was offensive to some people was not grounds for the ASA to determine that the ad breached the Code.
Media owner Amplify Outdoor said it had not received any complaints directly. It reviewed the image to ensure it was suitable and provided Em Rose with a list of potential sites. Those sites excluded locations within 100 metres of schools.
The firm believed the ad was suitable for public display because it did not mention sexual services or pornographic content. OnlyFans was a locked site that prevented under-18s from accessing explicit content. It believed the image was similar to those used in shampoo, gym wear and lingerie advertising. It was, in its view, relevant to the advertiser’s brand and business and did not employ sexual appeal in a manner that was exploitative of women.
The company also cited the ruling on Eliza Rose Watson, whose similar poster was found not to be in breach of the Code despite 30 complaints.
However, the ad watchdog had other ideas. It ruled that Rose’s expression, in combination with the styling and her pose, was suggestive and coquettish and therefore would be seen as sexualised and provocative. Although it did acknowledge the ad formed her social media handle, it considered that impression was further reinforced by the accompanying text “Emrosebydark”.
The ad was shown in London close to a main road, which was an untargeted medium, and was therefore likely to be seen by large numbers of people, including under-18s.
Although the ASA acknowledged that Amplify had applied a targeting restriction in selecting a site that was not within 100 metres of any schools, it considered that because the ad was overtly sexual and was displayed in an untargeted medium where it had the potential to be seen by a large number of people, including children, it was irresponsible and likely to cause widespread offence.
Banning the ad on both counts, the regulator also warned Rose about future advertising in outdoor media.
Related stories
No cover-up needed for Eliza Rose Watson OnlyFans ad
Protests fail to black out Ann Summers lingerie TV ad
‘Meditating’ Salesforce ad swerves offensive complaints
Animal groups see red as ASA clears pro-farming ads
‘Distasteful’ horror movie ad spared chainsaw massacre
The beat goes on: ‘unsettling’ Billie Eilish ad is cleared
