TheRetailer_Autumn_2019

Gender stereotyping in advertising - and why humour won’t save you!

OLIVER BRAY PARTNER – COMMERCIAL RPC

LUCY HOUGHTON ASSOCIATE – COMMERCIAL RPC

IMAGINE AN AD IN WHICH TWO DADS ARE SITTING IN A RESTAURANT WITH THEIR NEW BABIES. THE FATHERS BECOME DISTRACTED, AND THE BABIES ARE CARRIED AWAY BY THE CONVEYOR BELT FOR THE FOOD. ONE DAD SAYS: “LET’S NOT TELL MUM”. IRRESPONSIBLE ADVERTISING, OR A HUMOROUS POKE ABOUT DOZY DADS? This was in fact a real ad for Philadelphia cheese – an ad which 128 people felt compelled to complain about to the UK’s main advertising regulator, the Advertising Standards Authority (the ASA). They argued that the ad perpetuated harmful stereotypes about men and their caring responsibilities. In its defence, Mondelez (who own Philadelphia) argued that it was “stuck in a no-win situation”; it had chosen two fathers to avoid the stereotype that mothers should handle childcare responsibilities. The ASA thought differently and agreed with the complainants that the ad relied on the negative gender stereotype that men were unable to care for children. The humour in the ad was no defence and the ad was banned. The background Gender stereotyping is a hot topic. The Fawcett Society recently reported that 45% of adults believe they have experienced gender stereotyping from childhood. 51% of people said that gender stereotypes had constrained their career choices, while 44% believed these had harmed their personal relationships. It’s unsurprising, therefore, that the ASA has chosen to introduce a new rule and guidance designed to combat harmful gender stereotyping in advertising. The change follows its review (July 2017), which showed that negative gender stereotypes can be reinforced by advertising – in turn restricting the choices, aspirations and opportunities of people of all ages. The rules have got tougher The new rule was introduced into the UK’s advertising codes (section 4.9 of the CAP Code² and section 4.14 of the BCAP Code³ ) in June 2019. It applies to broadcast and non-broadcast media (including online and social media). It bans ads which are “likely to cause harm or serious or widespread offence”. This is a tougher test than before, as previously only ads causing serious or widespread harm could be deemed unacceptable by the ASA. The ASA’s guidance for advertisers To help advertisers get ready for the introduction of the new rule, in December 2018, CAP published a guidance note entitled “Depicting gender stereotypes likely to cause harm or serious or widespread offence”. The guidance note sets out principles relating to various types of gender-stereotypical portrayals, as well as scenarios to help identify those which the ASA will deem unacceptable. These scenarios (essentially ‘red alerts’ for the creative teams) include the following:

1.

Gender-stereotypical roles and characteristics Pressure to conform to an idealised gender- stereotypical body shape or physical features

2.

3. 4. 5.

Children

Potentially vulnerable groups

People who don’t conform to a gender stereotype

Applying the new rule In addition to the Philadelphia ad, the key decisions so far involve TV ads for Volkswagen’s eGolf, Buxton’s bottled water and Fosters. It is worth looking at the Volkswagen and Buxton ads, as these illustrate how fine the line is drawn between different gender- based scenarios: In the Volkswagen eGolf ad, the footage depicted men in adventurous situations (in space, climbing a cliff face and competing in sport), while also featuring a woman caring for a new-born child. The ASA considered that the juxtaposition of men in extraordinary environments, carrying out adventurous activities, and a woman in a passive and care-giving role “directly contrasted stereotypical male and female roles and characteristics in a manner that gave the impression that they were exclusively associated with one gender”. The ad was banned; In contrast, the Buxton bottled water ad featured a female ballet dancer, a male drummer, and a male rower each practising their different skills. The complainants felt that these images perpetuated negative gender stereotypes, by depicting characters doing activities they considered to be gender stereotypical. The ASA believed that the ad focussed on the characters’ shared characteristics – drive, determination and talent - rather than gender stereotypes, and held that the ad was not in breach. Conclusion Advertisers should take care to ensure that their ads do not promote what could be considered to be harmful gender stereotypes, or suggest that stereotypical roles or characteristics are always associated with one gender. It follows that if you are creating ads to be shown in the UK market, you need to think carefully about your narrative and castings. The good news is that the ASA’s application of its new rule means that ads may feature people undertaking gender-stereotypical roles. However, the key is to avoid suggesting that stereotypical roles or characteristics are always uniquely associated with one gender; the only options available to one gender; or never carried out or displayed by another gender - for example, portraying men as being bad at stereotypically “feminine” tasks, such as vacuuming or parenting. And if you do use gender-stereotypical roles, make sure your focus is on the right elements – as in the Buxton ad which brought out shared male and female levels of drive and talent. Above all, forget the idea that humour will save a gender stereotyping ad which sails too close to the wind. So, goodbye to ads which feature inept or dozy dads, and hello to a focus on shared ‘human’ traits like determination and a desire for success.

¹7 March 2019 ²UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing (CAP Code) ³The UK Code of Broadcast Advertising (BCAP Code)

22 | autumn 2019 | the retailer