Recent research findings show that the well-being of children is frequently mentioned as a crucial factor motivating individuals to lodge formal complaints about advertisements.
The study revealed that the portrayal of children and the potential harm they could suffer from being exposed to offensive advertisements constitute 46 per cent of the reasons for complaints submitted to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
The analysis examined thousands of consumer complaints associated with advertisements from the non-profit sector. It found that graphic representations—such as depictions of violence, sexual content, or disease—were also highly problematic, contributing to an additional 20 per cent of complaints.
Moreover, certain representations involving crime, weapons, and drugs were also identified as sources of offence. A research team from the University of Edinburgh analysed 9,055 complaints received over six years concerning advertisements from the not-for-profit, third, and public sectors, which include charities, government entities, and advocacy groups.
The study mainly focused on the non-commercial sector, where using shock tactics to garner attention or connect with audiences is more common and tends to provoke more complaints. Advertisements from this sector might also be perceived by consumers as more acceptable due to the perceived nobility of the organisations’ causes, as suggested by experts.
The complaints pertained to advertisements across various media, including television, print, and online platforms. Charities had the highest number of complaints, at 38 per cent, followed by government organisations, at 29 per cent. Campaigns by medical and children’s charities notably triggered numerous complaints based on offence or harm.
The dataset spanned from 2009 to 2015, including the regulatory responses manifested in the ASA’s adjudications. Researchers noted a higher prevalence of offence and harm-based complaints in the non-commercial sector, with 62 per cent of all complaints falling under this category, in contrast to the commercial sector, where complaints often centred around misleading content.
The portrayal of children emerged as the most frequent issue, garnering 4,157 complaints during the six years. Of the 9,055 complaints, only 138 (1.5 per cent) were fully upheld, and 629 (7 per cent) were partially upheld. This led researchers to question the potential biases of the advertising regulator and its effectiveness in safeguarding the public, particularly in the non-profit context where the rationale behind the messaging might be deemed justifiable.
The study advocates for advertisers to test their advertisements with both intended and unintended audiences, including relevant vulnerable groups and parents, and to carefully schedule and place their advertisements to target audiences to minimise the risk of offence and harm, especially to children.
It also calls for the advertising regulator to consider adapting its approach to managing the non-commercial sector, differing from its methods in commercial contexts. Dr Kristina Auxtova, from the University of Edinburgh Business School and the study’s lead researcher, emphasised the importance of understanding the broad range of sources of offence and harm in non-profit and public sector advertising. She highlighted the need for advertisers and regulators to grasp public perceptions of what is offensive or harmful and for regulators to be equipped to address and manage contemporary concerns effectively.
More information: Kristina Auxtova et al, Offensive and Harmful Advertising: A Content Analysis of Official Complaints, Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing. DOI: 10.1080/10495142.2024.2345908
Journal information: Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing Provided by University of Edinburgh