The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) recently ruled on an ad showing a
Mazda 323 Sport against a blurred background. The caption read, "Why
Keep Up with the Jones's When You Can Overtake?" The ASA ruled that the
ad "glamorised speed" and "condoned fast driving".
They directed Mazda to withdraw the ad, and told them not to do it again.
The text of the Authority's adjudication clearly states that Mazda consulted
their Committee of Advertising Practice Copy Advice Team before running the ad.
The ASA also accepted that the ad's main message was not about speed. They
agreed that the photograph did not suggest that the car was breaking the speed
limit, or being driven recklessly.
So how did Mazda violate section 48.3 of the ASA code, advising advertisers
not to "portray speed in a way that might encourage motorists to drive
irresponsibly or to break the law"? According to ASA Press Officer
Donna Mitchell, the Mazda conformed to the letter of the law, but violated its
spirit. "It gave an overall impression that going fast is something you
should aspire to."
The ASA's decision was based on a single complaint, and a simple premise:
that sexy images of fast driving have a negative impact on driving behaviour.
Even the Secretary for the Committee of Advertising Practice, the group
responsible for writing the ASA's rules, admits that there's no scientific basis
for this argument. "I don't know of any research which links performance
car advertising and accidents," Guy Parker says. "It's the fear
of a link that's led to this rule."
That happened in 1995, after motor industry and advertising execs met with
the DETLR to discuss the "problem" of performance car ads. Once they'd
consulted with the government's road safety lobby, carmakers and ad agencies
worked with the ASA to hash out the current rules. In other words, the auto
industry itself is partially responsible for the advertising prohibition against
equating speed with fun.
This move to self-censorship came against a background of intense pressure
from the EU. Six years before the ASA code, the European Conference of Ministers
of Transport passed a resolution urging member states "to regard as
inappropriate any advertising whose content extols performance or power and
treats driving as a sport [or] shows scenes evoking motor racing, lightning
acceleration and top speeds."
Dr. Oliver Grey, Head of The European Ad Standards Alliance (EASA), says that
Eurocrats were not deterred by the absence of research into the affects of
advertising on driver behaviour. "Brussels is never terribly concerned
about facts. They simply perceive a problem, then do something about it."
Dr. Grey says UK car advertisers figured a strict voluntary code was the best
way to fend off European action.
Meanwhile, the Independent Television Commission (ITC) saw fit to impose
similar editorial restrictions on TV car adverts. Section 11.9.2 of their code
says advertisers must not "encourage or condone fast or irresponsible
driving… nor refer to speeds over 70mph… nor demonstrate power,
acceleration, handling characteristics etc except in a clear context of safety."
And "any references to such characteristics must not imply excitement or
competitiveness."
As
a statutory body, the ITC has teeth. So far, they've yanked TV ads for the
Peugeot 206 GTI (showing magician David Blaine accelerating a 206 into the
distance) and the Volvo S40 T4 (showing a child's fascination with speed-blurred
images). As in the Mazda case, the Peugeot investigation was launched after a
single complaint. The Volvo investigation was launched after 15. Press Officer
Helena Hurd freely admits that the ITC's rules aren't based on the amount of
public outcry an ad elicits, or scientific evidence of its harmful affects. In
fact, Ms. Hurd believes the ITC's code obviates the need for any research into
the impact of performance-related car ads: "
Maybe because the rules
exists, the problem doesn't arise
The ITC's code is currently up for review. The agency has consulted the motor
and advertising industries on the current wording of the motoring section. No
one in either camp has expressed a desire to modify the code. Once again, the
people who make and sell sports cars have given their tacit approval to the
prohibition against suggesting that driving fast - legally - is desirable.
The auto industry's pre-emptive Euro appeasement on this issue has set a
dangerous precedent. After all, if car ads with blurred backgrounds are
considered too inflammatory for impressionable readers, why should magazines or
websites be allowed to use them? Why should car media like Evo, PistonHeads.com
or Top Gear be allowed to "glamorise" fast driving? If you take the
argument to its logical conclusion, why should manufacturers be allowed to build
powerful sports cars in the first place?
I suggest you email your answers to the ASA, ITC and EASA at the addresses
below, before it's too late.
1 / 2
![](data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 4 3"%3E%3C/svg%3E)
![](data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg xmlns="https://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 1 1"%3E%3C/svg%3E)