Watchdog dismisses complaint over sex 'gel' ad

Josie Clarke,Press Association
Wednesday 10 March 2010 07:43 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Complaints about a television ad for a sex lubricant that appeared before its 11pm restriction were not upheld by a watchdog.

Viewers complained the ad for Durex Play O gel, which showed the facial expressions of women who appeared to be experiencing sexual ecstasy, was offensive and unsuitable for broadcast.

The ad was cleared for broadcast after 11pm but appeared on Channel 4 shortly after 10pm during Gordon Ramsay's F Word and Derren Brown Presents the 3D Magic Spectacular programmes.

Channel 4 said Gordon Ramsay's F Word was of an adult nature and contained strong language and sexual innuendo, and that viewers of the programme would not have been offended by the ad.

The Advertising Standards Authority noted the viewers who complained believed the ad was unsuitable for broadcast at any time.

Rejecting the complaints, the ASA said: "We acknowledged the viewers' concern and appreciated that advertisers and broadcasters needed to be aware of the sensitive nature of ads for this type of product.

"We considered that this ad was not overtly graphic, contained no explicit material and was unlikely to cause offence, provided it was scheduled appropriately."

Child audience figures showed the ad had been scheduled appropriately and was unlikely to cause offence to viewers, the ASA said.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in