Charity ads face tougher sanctions

The ad watchdog is planning to take tougher action against charity ads which generate complaints following research that showed some members of the public believe they go too far in using distressing imagery.
The move has been a long time coming; the Advertising Standards Authority first mooted stronger sanctions after publishing its harm and offence report 15 months ago, back in August 2012.
The research showed that many participants felt charity ads contained offensive content “that went too far in seeking to make people feel uncomfortable or guilty, or used imagery that was considered too distressing despite being for a worthwhile cause”.
Some adults believed that charity advertising had purposefully targeted children in order to harness their ‘pester power’ to get parents to donate. Children themselves reported feeling distressed by charity advertising, but also upset due to their inability to help.
The ASA has defended itself against potential criticism that it has been slow to react by highlighting what it has been doing since the report was first published.
This has included an analysis of complaints data and its decisions between 2010 and 2013 to see if there were any trends and whether complaints tallied with the sentiments expressed by participants in its research. It has also met with the ad industry and several charities to ask for their views on the research, in addition to studying TV scheduling data to gauge the kind of charity ads that have appeared on children’s channels.
As a result of this, the ASA has decided to put more checks in place when assessing complaints about charity and public service ads over the next six months, with all complaints being studied by the ASA Council, the body that decides whether ads have breached the codes of practice.
Previously the council would look only at complaints that were being investigated or when its views were being sought on whether the regulator should investigate.
Following the six-month period, the regulator will then decide whether or not to change its approach to charity advertising.
The ASA said in a statement: “Traditionally, we’ve granted more leeway to these types of advert because of the importance of the issues they raise awareness for. But our research has prompted us to question whether we’re getting things right.
“Although a thorough and comprehensive analysis of our own complaints data – both the nature and relatively low volume – supports our view that we’re drawing the line in the right place at present, we don’t feel we can ignore the strength of feeling shown by the spontaneous responses in the Harm and Offence research.”
A number of charity ads have fallen foul of the ASA since the report was first published, including campaigns for Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO), and Cancer Research UK, while a TV ad from St John Ambulance was the 10th most complained-about commercial in 2012 (pictured).
However, plenty of others – such as the British Heart Foundation, NSPCC, and the RSPCA – have escaped sanction despite attracting a raft of complaints.