AN advert for ice-cream featuring a young nun and priest who appear on the verge of kissing has been banned after complaints that it was offensive to those working in religious orders.
The saucy press ad, with the strapline “Kiss temptation”, was run by ice-cream brand Antonio Federici Gelato Italiano. It appeared in Delicious and Sainsbury magazines.
In banning the ad for breaching CAP Code clause 5.1 (Decency), the Advertising Standards Authority said:
The ad stated ‘KISS TEMPTATION’ and the two were portrayed in a seductive pose, as if they were about to kiss passionately.
We considered that the portrayal of the priest and nun in a sexualised manner and the implication that they were considering whether or not to give in to temptation, was likely to cause serious offence to some readers.
Just how offended readers were is reflected in the avalanche of complaints the ASA received: a staggering TEN!
Antonio Fedirici Gelato Italiano said the ad was meant to be a “light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek portrayal celebrating forbidden Italian temptations”, which its ice-cream represented.
The ice-cream manufacturer added that the ad was unlikely to “offend deeply” and that it was significant that the image did not show the nun and the priest actually touching or kissing.
According to the ASA:
Seven Squared Publishing, who published Delicious and Sainsburys Magazines, explained that both publications were targeted at an adult audience aged between 25 and 55 years. They felt the ad was tongue-in-cheek and unlikely to offend their readers.
They received two complaints from Delicious Magazine readers and five complaints from Sainsburys Magazine readers. They apologised for any offence caused and advised they had no plans to publish the ad again in future issues.
That ad campaign certainly worked. I'm just off to Sainsburys to buy a big tub of Fedirici's, as recommended by snogging zombie worshippers.
That ad campaign certainly worked. I'm just off to Sainsburys to buy a big tub of Federici's, as recommended by snogging zombie worshippers.
That picture has certainly made my raspberries ripple!
I understand and share the complaints: That picture is not at all realistic; instead of a nun it should depict a young innocent boy.
Of course that ad is offensive. It is positively wrong, it should be a choirboy not a nun!
Could well be a boy, Flea. You clocked the size of the nun's spoon-bearing hand?
Beware, Remigius: A moment on the lips; a lifetime on the hips!
Haha I just tried to link to the CV website from the article (from work internet)
and got this
Request denied by WatchGuard HTTP proxy.
Reason: one or more categories denied helper='WebBlocker.2' details='Intolerance & Hate'
Yes I noticed "the hand" primed for action as well!
What I find incredible is the idea of a nun and priest enjoying themselves.
If they'd just roped in the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence they'd have saved a lot of trouble!
I really hate contrived controversiality. I bet marketing/advertisers have a little formula for this. They have a sliding scale where they rate different ideas and balance the number of lost customers to the potential gained through free publicity. I have to say I hate advertisements rammed down my throat as much as sermons, so noone wins today. I do fancy an icecream….after confession though. – Damnit it worked, they got me!
Or alterboy?
I have to disagree, I laugh my head off every time that an advertiser prods the usual idiots with a stick in full knowledge that they never ever fail to react. I always cite the Beneton ads which ran for something like ten years before the bad taste police caught on that they were being used.
If the Vatican had been smart, it would have stepped in and instructed the magazines to keep running an ad that implied that nuns and priests are heterosexual.
The Advertising Standards Authority is run by the Advertisers – self regulating – and they are pro religion in my experience. I tried to get them to stop the lies being pushed on Welsh Language Television where the NSPCC place heart rending pictures of little children, including one with a tube in its arm in a hospital, and plead for money – £2 a month "child abuse must stop." The NSPCC does not stop child abuse, has no powers to intervene temselves, and in an infamous case in South Wales ignored requests from neighbours on a sink Housing Estate to help a child who was eventually tortured to death. The ASA sent me a semi literate reply which I responded to by accusing them of being a "conduit for the NSPCC."
Things got a bit heavy, I was referred to London and they still let the NSPCC continue. Meanwhile, 20 Christian twats somewhere or other complained about an advert and that was banned. PS I sent a large bundle of papers, evidence produced and printed at my expense, to the "appropriate person" in the Welsh Assembly. Heard no more. Disappeared into then air.