U.K. regulator bans shower gel ad for perpetuating racial stereotypes
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) acted after receiving complaints about the ad from two people 'who believed the ad perpetuated negative stereotypes about people with darker skin tones,' it said in a statement Wednesday.
The spot, which aired in June, featured a Black model whose skin is covered with red scratch marks and another covered with a cracked material that looks like clay.
'Try to take a shower with the new Sanex skin therapy and its patented amino acid complex. For 24-hour hydration feel,' a voice-over said, accompanying video of a White woman showering.
'Relief could be as simple as a shower,' it added.
U.S. consumer products company Colgate-Palmolive, which owns the Sanex brand, said the fact that the ad featured models with different skin tones demonstrated its commitment to diversity, according to the ASA's statement.
The regulator said Colgate-Palmolive believed 'the depiction of diverse models in the ad, either experiencing skin discomfort or post-product relief, was utilized in a 'before and after' scenario to show their product was suitable and effective for all, rather than as a comparison based on race or ethnicity.'
Clearcast, a company that checks whether TV commercials follow the U.K. Code of Broadcast Advertising before they can be aired, also said the ad demonstrated the inclusivity of Sanex.
While the ASA accepted the argument that the ad showed 'before and after' scenarios to demonstrate the effectiveness of the product, it ruled that its structure was problematic.
'It was the black skin, depicted in association with itchy and dry skin, which was shown to be problematic and uncomfortable, whereas the white skin, depicted as smoother and clean after using the product, was shown successfully changed and resolved,' the statement said.
'That could be interpreted as suggesting that white skin was superior to black skin,' it added, while acknowledging that 'we understood that this message was not the one intended and might appear coincidental or pass unnoticed by some viewers.'
The ASA added that it had concluded the ad had breached the broadcast advertising code and was likely to cause serious offence.
CNN has contacted Colgate-Palmolive for comment.
By Jack Guy, CNN
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
7 hours ago
- CTV News
U.K. regulator bans shower gel ad for perpetuating racial stereotypes
London — U.K. regulators have banned a TV commercial for Sanex shower gel after ruling that it 'could be interpreted as suggesting that white skin was superior to black skin.' The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) acted after receiving complaints about the ad from two people 'who believed the ad perpetuated negative stereotypes about people with darker skin tones,' it said in a statement Wednesday. The spot, which aired in June, featured a Black model whose skin is covered with red scratch marks and another covered with a cracked material that looks like clay. 'Try to take a shower with the new Sanex skin therapy and its patented amino acid complex. For 24-hour hydration feel,' a voice-over said, accompanying video of a White woman showering. 'Relief could be as simple as a shower,' it added. U.S. consumer products company Colgate-Palmolive, which owns the Sanex brand, said the fact that the ad featured models with different skin tones demonstrated its commitment to diversity, according to the ASA's statement. The regulator said Colgate-Palmolive believed 'the depiction of diverse models in the ad, either experiencing skin discomfort or post-product relief, was utilized in a 'before and after' scenario to show their product was suitable and effective for all, rather than as a comparison based on race or ethnicity.' Clearcast, a company that checks whether TV commercials follow the U.K. Code of Broadcast Advertising before they can be aired, also said the ad demonstrated the inclusivity of Sanex. While the ASA accepted the argument that the ad showed 'before and after' scenarios to demonstrate the effectiveness of the product, it ruled that its structure was problematic. 'It was the black skin, depicted in association with itchy and dry skin, which was shown to be problematic and uncomfortable, whereas the white skin, depicted as smoother and clean after using the product, was shown successfully changed and resolved,' the statement said. 'That could be interpreted as suggesting that white skin was superior to black skin,' it added, while acknowledging that 'we understood that this message was not the one intended and might appear coincidental or pass unnoticed by some viewers.' The ASA added that it had concluded the ad had breached the broadcast advertising code and was likely to cause serious offence. CNN has contacted Colgate-Palmolive for comment. By Jack Guy, CNN
Globe and Mail
9 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
1 Reason to Buy NVO
Key Points It is clearly very effective at developing drugs. Its Wegovy recently earned FDA approval for a new indication. 10 stocks we like better than Novo Nordisk › It's one thing for a pharmaceutical company to have a blockbuster drug in its portfolio. It's quite another if such a product can be successfully extended to win approvals for other indications. This is one huge reason to believe in the future of Novo Nordisk (NYSE: NVO), the Danish company behind the immensely popular Wegovy obesity treatment. Last week the company earned a new feather in its cap with the product, and it feels as if it has far more distance to go with drug discovery. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » Wegovy has legs In mid-August the company hit paydirt when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved it as a treatment for noncirrhotic metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) in adult patients with moderate to advanced liver fibrosis. The drug is intended to be used in combination with an increase in physical activity, and a reduction in caloric food intake. It probably goes without saying that America's obesity problem affects far more individuals than does MASH. But Novo Nordisk's successful development of the drug to treat the liver disorder demonstrates two very positive things; 1) Wegovy (and by extension its sibling medication, Ozempic) has the potential to treat numerous other afflictions and, 2) generally, the company is adept at developing its molecules for a variety of indications. Pipeline to greater success? Novo Nordisk has quite the impressively wide pipeline, and semaglutide (the molecule which is the primary ingredient of Wegovy and Ozempic) is only one part of it. It's in the later stages of investigating the drug for treatment of Alzheimer's; meanwhile, it's got a host of other molecules in programs aimed in many therapeutic directions. With such a high pitch of activity, the future is bright for semaglutide and other investigational drugs. And, by extension, their developer. Should you invest $1,000 in Novo Nordisk right now? Before you buy stock in Novo Nordisk, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Novo Nordisk wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $671,466!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,115,633!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,077% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 18, 2025
CBC
a day ago
- CBC
Young soccer players who 'head' the ball face cognitive decline, new research shows
Social Sharing A new study from Western University found the practice of hitting a soccer ball with the head leads to noticeable cognitive decline in young players, and researchers are now calling for more restrictions in the sport. Over the course of a five-month season, the study tracked a U13 London soccer team made up of male players around 11 and 12 years old. Researchers fitted each player with a custom mouth guard to track head impacts, and had them do regular cognitive tests. One of the main findings that stuck out to Rachel Watson, a PhD student at Western, was that every time a player hit the ball with their head, their reaction time slowed down by about six milliseconds. "Each time it was a small amount that it slowed down," Watson said. "But, by the end of the season, this all accumulated or snowballed into a much larger effect." Many more head hits occurred during practices compared to games, Watson and her team observed. With the team practicing four times per week, there were far more opportunities for head impacts than at weekly game, but some practice drills led to hundreds of these impacts, she said. Currently, policies are in place in Ontario to provide guidelines for coaches, stating how often players of different age groups should be hitting the ball with their heads. Kids under 11 should not be heading the ball at all, players aged 12 to 13 should have a maximum of one session per month with up to five head hits with a lightweight ball, and 14- to 17-year olds should have one session with up to 10 hits. These guidelines were not being followed when researchers were following the team's season, Watson said. Every coach needs to rethink what they're doing. "Coaches have a really great ability to limit this in practice and focus on emphasizing other alternative methods of controlling the ball," she said. "And what the athletes are practicing in practice will come out in the game." The team's coach, Jonathan O'Neill, was surprised by the results of the study, he said. While the study showed the majority of head impacts were occurring at practices, the team doesn't actually practice a lot of heading, he explained. Most of it would have happened on recovery days, when the team played soccer tennis or Teqball, which are variations of the sport with very low impact on the head, he said. "But obviously the low impact still had a cumulative effect on the players' nervous systems and their ability to respond to football interactions," O'Neill said. Heading will happen as a byproduct of the game, because players cannot control the opponent and the chaos that sometimes causes the ball to go into the air, he said. But the safety of players is paramount and now that the effects of heading on cognitive ability is better understood, every coach is going to have to rethink what they're doing, he added While heading the ball is just one of many technical skills in soccer, Watson said, young athletes are likely not thinking about the short or long term effects of their actions—whether they are unaware of them, or simply don't care. Even if banning the practice of heading is not fully attainable yet, Watson believes coaches and parents should emphasize the findings of this study to really get it across to the players that it can be harmful. "Then when the athletes are older, stronger and more developed and more aware of the effects of head impacts, they can choose to make an informed decision themselves if they want to head the ball or not."
