“Sometimes ‘thinking outside the box’ for brands can take an unfortunate turn.” – or so says the Sortlist CMO Nicolas Finet.
In a time rampant with marketing campaigns, it is easy for some brands and their ads to fade into the background, to become lost in the crowd … a where’s Wally situation if you like.
It is vital for companies to create advertisements that scream and shout (and let it all out) for attention.
However, some of these ads can often cross the border into murky waters and cause offence to TV viewers across the UK.
From the dubious task of marketing sugary sweets to children, to more evil acts of encouraging animal cruelty, Sortlist research has revealed that the top 10 most complained about adverts in the UK have racked up over 15,000 complaints in total.
It is fair to say that the British general public does not shy away from expressing their opinion when they believe a brand has overstepped the mark. Karen? Is that you?
Marketing Beat takes a look at the most offensive TV ads of the last few years.
10: Cadbury’s Freddo the Frog comic – 128 complaints
Back in 2018, Mondelez (Cadbury) published a downloadable children’s comic book on their website, and two YouTube videos, both featuring a cartoon Freddo the Frog.
The same cartoon advertisement was also spotted on a bus stop poster near a primary school.
A total of 128 complainants argued that the Mondelez adverts were encouraging children to eat chocolate. What? No way!
Advertisements that present products high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS products) are not permitted to be directed towards children.
Though Mondelez told the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) that the content “was not focused on children under 16”, it ultimately ruled that the chocolate company’s campaign was in breach of existing advertising codes.
Freddo won’t be landing near a school anytime soon.
READ MORE: Cadbury partners with Manchester United for virtual Easter egg hunt
9: Ryanair’s low emission claims – 167 complaints
Across various adverts in September 2019, Ryanair claimed to be Europe’s ‘low CO2 emissions airline’.
The Irish company came up with the calculation that 66g of CO2 was emitted for “every passenger kilometre flown”, suggesting that it had “the lowest carbon emissions of any major airline”.
Some 167 people complained about whether the claims were misleading. One of these complainants was in fact a consultant in energy, transport and sustainable development.
Ryanair’s plead that the phrase “low CO2 emissions” actually meant “less than average”, did not stop the ASA from ruling the ads to be misleading and in breach of regulatory codes.
It seems nothing flies past the ASA.
READ MORE: ASA on ‘red alert’ as it clamps down on ‘irresponsible’ crypto ads
8: Photobox’s Great Dane riding – 212 complaints
This 2017 ad featured a young boy sitting on and pretending to ride a Great Dane dog.
The RSPCA and 211 more people called in to complain and challenged whether the photo company’s video displayed and encouraged harmful actions towards an animal.
Photobox stated that the image was created using special effects and that the boy and the dog were filmed completely separately “as to ensure the safety of both parties”. A veterinarian was also present on set.
The ASA found these claims to be true and took no further action.
Photobox used its photo-cropping skills to get out of this one.
7: Deliveroo’s magic bag – 300 complaints
Deliveroo’s 2019 television ad depicted a woman receiving a delivery from which she distributed meals from several different restaurants out of one single bag.
Some 300 people called in to criticise the advert’s confusing nature.
“The complainants, who understood each restaurant would need a separate order, each incurring a delivery fee, with each meal then delivered separately, challenged whether the ad was misleading,” the ASA said.
Though the food delivery service claimed it was “clear” the ad was not set in an “ordinary household”, regulators affirmed that it must not be broadcast again.
Deliveroo did not pull that one out of the bag.
6: Go Compare’s car crash – 336 complaints
Go Compare opera singer, Gio Compario’s dramatised car accident totaled a complaint tally of 336.
The 2019 television advert displayed Compario and his car hitting a fallen tree in the road and dramatically flipping over it.
Road safety charity Brake! branded the insurance advert a “serious misjudgment” and said it trivialized the deaths of people on British roads.
According to ITV, the ASA stated that complainants highlighted the insensitivity of the ad towards victims and families affected by road accidents.
Despite the complaints, the ad was not taken down and the price comparison site has since featured a similar ad featuring a deer incident.
5: Paddy Power’s Blind Wanderers FC – 1,313 complaints
In 2010, Paddy Power ran an ad that featured a football match between two blind football teams.
The ball carries a bell to alert the players to its location. Unfortunately, the ball disappears and is replaced by a cat with a bell on its collar. The cat is subsequently kicked off the pitch and into a tree.
A whopping 1,313 complainants claimed the betting company’s ad was offensive to blind people and encouraged animal cruelty.
According to the Guardian, the ASA agreed with Paddy Power’s view that it was a clearly rare and “absurd” scenario and thus took no further action.
4: Ryanair’s ‘Jab and Go! – 2,371 complaints
This one did not fly too well.
In the middle of the global pandemic towards the end 2020, Ryanair released a TV advert promoting offers for the following 2021 summer, using the tagline “Jab and go!”
The video displayed a medical syringe labeled vaccine and stated that vaccines were coming in time for the summer.
A sizeable 2,370 people found the airline’s ad misleading as it implied that most of the UK population would be successfully vaccinated against Covid-19 by spring/summer 2021.
They also felt it “trivialised the ongoing restrictions and effects of the pandemic on society”.
The ASA concluded that the campaign was “irresponsible” and must not be broadcast again “in the form complained of.”
3: Booking.com’s ‘Booking’ – 2,500
Booking.com came up with the unique idea to repeatedly use “booking” as a substitute for swear words in its 2015 TV advertisement.
A total of 2,500 people complained to the ASA, claiming the travel agency’s ad was offensive and encouraged bad language amongst children.
“We did not uphold the complaints, judging that it was a light-hearted play on words that couldn’t be mistaken for an actual swear word,” the ASA said.
The self-regulatory authority also added that it was unlikely to encourage swearing in children as they would be too young to pick up on the joke.
How the book did they get away with that one.
2: Tesco and Father Christmas’ Covid passport – 3,000 complaints
Runner-up to the most complained about TV ad of the last few years, is Tesco’s Father Christmas Covid passport ad.
The TV campaign features Father Christmas using his Covid passport to get through airport security to deliver his presents across the world.
A 2021 high of 3,000 complaints found the supermarket’s ad to be “coercive” and claimed it encouraged medical discrimination based on vaccine status.
It caused quite the controversy on social media and also lead to the anti-vaccination movement threatening to boycott Tesco.
The ASA took no action and told the Guardian that they deemed the ad to be a “humorous reference to international travel rules people have experienced this year.”
1: Paddy Power and Oscar Pistorius – 5,523 complaints
The winner, the most complained about ad of recent years, with a mammoth 5,523 complaints is Paddy Power’s 2015 Oscar Pistorius campaign.
The bookmakers controversially offered betters their money back if Paralympian Oscar Pistorius was cleared of murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp after the tragic event in 2013.
The phrase “It’s Oscar Time. Money back if he walks,” appeared next to an Oscar award with Pistorius’ face on.
The ASA ordered Paddy Power to withdraw the ad “with immediate effect”, after receiving an “unprecedented” amount of complaints that said the video trivialized the death of a woman.
Thankfully, the TV campaign has not been seen since.
Click here to sign up to Marketing Beat’s free daily email newsletter
