Latest news with #CodeofAdvertisingPractice
IOL News
3 days ago
- Health
- IOL News
Advertising Regulatory Board scrutinises smart technology health assessment claims
The Advertising Regulatory Board had to decide whether a commercial, which advertised smart technology in relation to assessing blood pressure, was irresponsible or not. Image: File Picture A radio advertisement regarding new smart technology which is said to be capable of doing a health assessment by measuring blood pressure came under the spotlight by the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) following a complaint by a member of the public. The commercial features Afrikaans dialogue between 'Johan' and 'clever Werner' of Momentum. Werner proceeds to promote the advertiser's new smart technology with a "selfie video". Werner notes that this technology measures heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen, and stress levels on your smartphone. The complainant submitted that smartphone applications, such as the one promoted, do not 'measure' blood pressure. They can only calculate it by using data provided. It is dangerous to claim that this application can 'measure' high pressure, as mistakes could lead to death, the complaint read. The advertiser explained that its application relies on smartphone-enabled remote photoplethysmography, a technology that estimates vital signs— including blood pressure— based on subtle changes in skin colouration detected via the camera. This technology is not speculative or experimental; it has been widely used in clinical environments for years, it said. The advertiser explained that it has partnered with an international provider who operates on the cutting edge of this technology. It said the advertised service allows customers to gain insights into their vital signs, and it (the advertiser) has taken care not to promote this as a substitute for a medical device or clinical diagnosis. The directorate, in giving the green light to the advertisement, stressed that its decision should not be interpreted as expressing a view on the advertiser's technology. It can only determine whether the communication used to advertise such technology is possibly misleading, dishonest, or irresponsible in a way that the Code of Advertising Practice seeks to prevent. It pointed out that the dispute is about the wording used in this commercial and not the technology on which the advertiser relies. The complainant objected to the term 'measure' used and said that the smartphone app does no measuring and merely calculates or tracks blood pressure based on certain data. The directorate agreed that this would not constitute a 'measurement' as much as it would constitute a report or the tracking of one's blood pressure. However, from the advertiser's submissions, it would appear that its app does not simply track or report one's blood pressure but actually uses remote photoplethysmography to calculate and return a blood pressure reading. While true that this is not the same means of measurement that people have become accustomed to, such as inflating and deflating a cuff around the arm, it could reasonably be said that this constitutes a 'measurement,' as live readings and measurements are taken in real-time, the ARB stated. It added that, contrary to the complainant's submissions, this does not appear to simply be the reporting or prediction of blood pressure readings but an actual measurement using different technology to measure blood flow.
IOL News
19-06-2025
- Business
- IOL News
Billboard referring to women as 'Birdies' sparks outrage, ruled sexist by ARB
IOL A consumer complained to the Advertising Regulatory Board over a billboard that she felt was sexist. Image: Screenshot /ARB In a striking example of how language can stir public sentiment, a recent advertising campaign featuring two female estate agents described as 'birdies' has sparked outrage. This incident has ignited a passionate debate on the portrayal of women in advertising, drawing attention to the fine line between playful language and negative gender stereotyping. The complaint was lodged by a consumer who expressed her discontent over the term 'birdies' being used to refer to the two women depicted on a billboard by Chas Everitt International Property Group. In her argument to the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB), the consumer said the term implies a derogatory association. 'Not your average birdie' suggests that all women are 'birdies', but some are 'above average'. This raises questions about the attributes that render some women superior while others are relegated to a lesser status. Furthermore, she highlighted that the advertisement failed to establish any professional context linking the women to their work as estate agents, suggesting a disconnect that leads to public misunderstanding and discontent. In response, the advertiser, represented by attorneys Nochumsohn Pretorius, emphasised that they are not members of the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) and thus do not fall under its jurisdiction. Their detailed rebuttal highlighted that the term 'birdie' actually references a golfing score, arguing that it plays off both the golfing term and serves as a light-hearted descriptor for the women in the advertisement. Moreover, they contended that the word 'birdie' does not intrinsically possess a derogatory connotation towards women. Quoting dictionary definitions, they argued that 'birdie' does not imply diminutiveness or a lack of seriousness – a claim countered by the complainant citing widespread disapproval within community discussions, particularly on platforms like WhatsApp. Despite their defence, the ARB's Directorate found significant grounds for concern. They pointed out that referring to women as 'birdies' infantalises them and runs the risk of objectifying their professional roles, undermining the dignity and autonomy expected in advertising that portrays women as competent professionals. The disparity in how similar terms are perceived when applied to men versus women was also addressed, reinforcing the idea that the word 'bloke' does not carry the same implications as 'bird' does. Reflecting on the broader implications, the Directorate concluded that the advertisement violates clauses pertaining to unacceptable gender portrayals within the industry's Code of Advertising Practice, labelling it offensive and consequently instructing members of the board not to accept the advertisement in its current form. This ruling spotlights an ongoing struggle within advertising and media to balance creative expression with social responsibility. The outcome serves as a reminder that words carry weight and the importance of mindful representation in today's society. IOL News
The Citizen
05-05-2025
- Business
- The Citizen
Is Cactus Jack tequila or spirit cooler? Regulatory board demands label change
ARB said Cactus Jack could have easily avoided any risk of confusion by using the wording 'tequila sour blend' and 'spirit cooler' on the front label of its product. ARB ruled that Cactus Jack must change its labelling within three months. Picture: Facebook/Dial A Drink ZW The Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) has given the makers of alcoholic brand Cactus Jack three months from 16 April 2025 to change its label as it contains misleading information. The front label of Cactus Jack reads 'Tequila' and 'Premium Distilled Tequila.' But the back label says 'Spirit Cooler alcohol volume 12%.' Tequila or Spirit cooler? A consumer approached ARB, stating, 'The front labelling does not mention that this is a spirit cooler. One presumes from the labelling that it is a genuine tequila. 'The labelling is misleading and only on close inspection, when turning the bottle around, do you find it is only 14% spirit cooler'. According to ARB, Cactus Jack replied that it is not advertising the product as a 'Neat Tequila' but rather that 'it purely forms part of our label.' The front label of Cactus Jack. Picture: Supplied Tequila label approved Cactus Jack added that the product label complies fully with the relevant regulations and has been approved by the Department of Agriculture. 'It [Cactus Jack] is entitled to indicate the strength of the alcohol either on the front or back panel of the label, and it has chosen to do so on the back panel in font larger than the prescribed minimum size.' The brand assured ARB that it does use tequila in its product and is compliant with all laws relating to this. The back panel also indicates that the product is a 'tequila sour blend.' ALSO READ: Chicken Licken ad gets green light after being accused of mocking those struggling with mental health [VIDEO] What is inside Cactus Jack? Cactus Jack added that the product is of a 'hazed slightly green nature' while a 'neat' tequila would be labelled 'tequila/spirit distilled from the agave with a minimum alc/vol of 35% in the case of aged tequila (Gold or Amber in appearance) and 43% in the case of Blanco or Silver (transparent or clear in appearance) Tequila as it is known'. Cactus Jack's reply also corrected a mistake made by the complainant: that the product is 12%, not 14%. However, ARB notes that the complainant made a typo, and the complaint is not affected by it. The back label of Cactus Jack. Picture: Supplied Application of the Code of Advertising Practice ARB added that to make their decision, they had to consider two clauses of the Code of Advertising Practice: honesty and misleading claims. 'So, while the advertiser [Cactus Jack] is correct in stipulating the alcohol strength and class of alcohol in close proximity to each other, this does not mean that it can rely on the regulations to justify excluding important information relating to the nature and composition of the product from the front label of the product, if that exclusion is likely to create a false or misleading impression.' ARB said it believes consumers would assume any product with a front label stating 'tequila' and 'premium distilled tequila' is pure or neat tequila with nothing blended into it. ALSO READ: Here's why Cassper's Don Billiato advert was pulled Avoided confusion ARB said Cactus Jack could have easily avoided any risk of confusion by using the wording 'tequila sour blend' and 'spirit cooler' on the front label of its product. 'Using the claims 'Tequila' and 'Premium Distilled Tequila' when the product in question is not even simply a tequila blend but, in fact, a spirit cooler with only 12% alcohol, is unquestionably misleading.' 'The advertiser is instructed to amend its front label so that it does not create the impression that the product is pure tequila. The advertiser has three months to effect such an amendment, in terms of the Procedural Guide. 'Thereafter, members are instructed not to accept any advertising wherein the product is simply described as 'tequila' and/or 'premium distilled tequila.'' NOW READ: Three tips on how to get your return on advertising spend
