A complainant suggested this Kiwibank ad – featuring togs in a suburban street – was sexual harassment.
We unveil some of the more peculiar grizzles about advertisements over the past 12 months - from vibrators to burgers, skimpy togs, the way we drive, teenagers kissing and older people exercising. And, in one case, a nose-picker.
The complainant writes, rather defensively, “I am not prudish or trying to be a ‘Karen’.”
She is, she says, simply a 30-year-old mother wanting to protect her “child’s innocence”.
She has taken exception to a Kiwibank ad depicting a young man in skimpy swimming togs, talking to a girl selling cupcakes at a footpath stall in a suburban street.
The man and his friend don’t have their wallets – they’re in their togs – but the man’s behaviour and comments in revealing his swimming trunks while carrying a floatation toy would be deemed sexual harassment in real life, insists the non-Karen.
“I would like to draw your attention to the Tip Top ad which aired in 2006 called ‘TOGS TOGS, UNDIES’,” she writes in her complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority, using the full force of caps lock.
“In a light-hearted and comedic way, it illustrated when togs become undies. It states that if you can’t see the water, you’re in underpants. Clear and simple. I know many people my age would be able to recall this ad and instantly be able to call someone out if they were seen to be wearing their togs in a public setting that wasn’t the beach or swimming pool.
In this case, says the complainant, the man’s female friend “starts by saying, ‘We don’t have any pants’; the camera then flicks to him and he reinforces it by saying ‘Yeah, no pants’.”
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) effectively threw out the complaint, officially deeming no further action was required, as it did with a variety of other complaints about TV, digital, newspaper, radio and outdoor ads during the past 12 months.
While the authority reviewed 100 advertising complaints in 2024, there were dozens more that didn’t get past first base. Some people had some very personal, often peculiar concerns about specific marketing tactics and advertising content.
Whether it’s a vibrator, dropped puppies, a man picking his nose, the wobbly skin of old people, alleged racist undertones, the way people drive or the people who drive, there’s very little that escapes the attention of some viewers.
Here, then, are 25 of the more peculiar complaints of the past 12 months – most of them verbatim, save some corrections of grammar and spelling errors.
Almost all of the ads below were judged by the ASA to be, actually, okay – that is, no further action was required. Where that wasn’t the case, the ASA’s judgment is outlined.
1. Peaches and Cream ad for a vibrator. Complainant: “Ad is in extremely poor taste, acting like couples-related issues can be resolved by spending money on a marital aid (vibrator) when ‘couples therapy’ may be needed for a variety of issues, including [the] death of a loved one, physical or mental abuse, adultery/infidelity or a variety of other issues where implication that a vibrator would make it all go away not only would be insulting but potentially harmful.”
2. Latitude Homes. Complainant: “The advert shows a Kiwi crossing a pedestrian crossing and nearly getting run over. The cars should have stopped and allowed Kiwi to cross lawfully. It’s a bad example to show our people, they should stop for all pedestrian crossing[s] I believe.”
3. Universal Homes. Complainant: “This advert shows a man picking his nose. Completely inappropriate and disgusting! I don’t want to see that and especially around dinner time!!”
4. Frank Energy. Complainant: “Frank Energy advert shows two older female adults on exercise equipment that is making their loose skin wobble and make noises to show there is no difference between their service and other electricity providers. This is ageist content that discriminates against and mocks ageing.”
5. Burger fuel. Complainant: “The advertisement is for the Mitsufishi Burger and the catchphrase is ‘with you for a good time, not a long time’. There are a couple of issues with this: 1) cultural appropriation; 2) The catchphrase is clearly a derogatory sexual reference to Asian females that has been frequently used in Western movies and has racial undertones.”
6. Pet-n-Sur. Complainant: “This ad states that the child dropped a puppy and that the father was upset that the vet bill was $8000 because he had not taken out pet insurance. This ad is upsetting because of the dropped puppy which indicates that the child has not been taught correct animal handling and care. The ad suggests it’s okay to abuse animals as long as you have pet insurance. This advert is totally uncaring, unacceptable and upsetting and should be pulled off air.”
7. Fire and Emergency New Zealand. Complainant: “We were watching The Chase with our family when a very inappropriate ad came on for Fire and Emergency with swearing multiple times (yes it was beeped out) but very obvious what was implied. Very shocked to see this on TV. It was an ad so people don’t drink and cook.”
8. Pak’nSave. Complainant: “The Pak’nSave ad [shows a] shower [with] an electric oven in the water. My 8-year-old said isn’t that dangerous putting something electric in water. Yes!!! If an 8-year-old is picking this up and the dangers of electric appliances in water!! This obviously has had no thought put into the process of advertising.”
9. McDonald’s. Complainant: “The steering wheel is shown being incorrectly held. The driver should have both hands lightly gripping the steering wheel in the ‘quarter to three’ position or slightly lower. This is because of the possibility of injury if the airbag goes off. (ie hands should be at 9 and 3 NOT 10 and 2.”
10. NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi road safety. Complainant: “Ad showing a Māori man driving fast. The ad is inherently racist. Showing that the boss of a company is incapable of driving properly. And the young staff member with him is also Māori.”
11. New World. Complainant: “New World video ad published while watching TVNZ News in TVNZ app. I saw the ad on March 27th, 2024. The ad shows a man grocery shopping at New World and the comment says that he is earning more than just brownie points, and shows the man getting New World loyalty points and scanning his New World barcode. The brownie points comment suggests that grocery shopping is a favour he is doing his partner, and not a part of men’s usual duties. This perpetuates harmful stereotypes that household chores and women’s duty and when men do them it is somehow special and will earn them extra ‘brownie points’. Frankly, it is plain stupid in 2024 and as a woman I have had enough. Thank you.”
12. Brandt ad: Complainant: “The advert claims that New Zealand is the first country to see each day. That’s not true. That’s Kiribati. This may not be earth-shattering. But it’s a lie. Or ignorance. Nice strap line, but wrong. I have no idea what Brandt do or sell, but accuracy is important. Period.”
13. GlaxoSmithKline NZ. Complainant: “Shingrix advert, this advert is on day and night , it suggests you catch shingles from other people and shows 50-year-olds at a party. When I had shingles, people referred to those adverts and automatically believed you catch it when in fact it’s a medical condition caused from various other symptoms, not body to body.”
14. McDonald’s. Complaint 1: “The new McDonald’s ad presents as racist. The ad in question is the new McSpicy chicken burger. The [ad] shows pictures of Caucasians sweating and signalling that the burger is hot and the voiceover describing the burger as not suitable for everyone. The third person it shows enjoying the burger is a person of what appears to be Indian decent, eating the burger [and] not sweating or signalling that the burger is spicy at all. The voiceover describes the scene, for some, there is no issue with spice at all. Or to that effect.” Complaint 2: “McDonald’s McSpicy advert is racist. Showing that no ‘white’ person can handle the McSpicy. Only showing someone ‘ethnic’ handling the heat.” Complaint 3: “Television advert of food product depicting underlying racial profiling as to the specific spiciness of said food item.”
15. Avalanche Coffee. Complainant: “The ad featuring a topless Victor Vito is disgusting, exploitative and objectifying sexy rugby players and demeaning to all those less well-endowed. It must be removed immediately!”
16. Asahi Beverages – Pure Blonde beer. Complainant: “The advertiser gets rid of someone who is not blonde. This smacks of racial prejudice and it also copies a time of history where Jews were killed. The BLONDE and blue-eyed Arian race were considered superior. I cannot believe this advertisement was allowed to be aired. It is a travesty to the memory of Jews and many others.”
17. Repco. Complainant: “The content is offensive to Christian belief, advertising that ‘the temple of Bathhurst’ has a man performing miracles, waving his hands and changing events in an unexplained way. This belittles historical Christian [and] biblical Gospels and writings.”
18. Lotto. “Watching the animated Lotto ad with the 2 yellow balls as characters. One yellow ball was referring to a ‘black dog’ to the other yellow ball, and the yellow ball replied ‘I don’t have one’? Something to that effect anyway? In the past, I have understood the ‘black dog’ terminology as someone who experiences/suffers from depression. My immediate reaction was ‘If you win Lotto, you won’t have a black dog anymore ... hence no more depression’. Not the sort of message I find comforting nor appropriate: (Unless I totally misheard the ad??)”
19. KFC. Complainant: “With NZ’s disgraceful violence against women, I do not want to see a woman being elbowed out of the way so a bloke can eat his KFC. Even if it’s masked slightly by the attempt at a screen shift. Not okay, KFC and Sky.”
20. Vicks. Complaint 1: “Hi. I would like to bring it to your attention to how inappropriate one of your adds is. Specifically advertising Vicks for blocked nose where two teenagers are kissing. My 4 year old stopped in front of the TV to see that which was showing in the middle of the day on [a] weekend. She was asking me what are they doing. When it comes to age-appropriate programme, stick to it, what nonsense are you allowing ... kids to see? Totally inappropriate and tasteless, not sure who allowed this but I’d like to see this removed from TV immediately. Will take it further to the broadcasting complaints commission to bring it to their attention as well.” Complaint 2: “In regard to the advertisement on the New Zealand YouTube site, it is disgusting and inappropriate for young people to watch. Why. can’t they find a more decent way of promoting their products and do advertisements without those of very young children smooching in public.”
21. Expedia. Complainant: “The Expedia ad has a man cooking with a very large flame and a child throwing flour into the air close to the flame. This is extremely hazardous! It can explode. This is my first ever complaint about TV and I am doing this as I feel very strongly about it.”
22. Foodstuffs/Four Square: Complainant: “I am complaining about the ad where the main character is at the head of the table at a feast and he bangs the table and [says] ‘YOU CALL THIS A FEAST?’ He is a bully and it makes me feel uncomfortable as it displays family verbal abuse and verbal violence as others run away and try to appease the man. Please do not air it again.”
23. Frank Energy. Complainant: “My complaint is [about] the Frank Energy advert, specifically that [it] focuses on the shaving of mature men with a large volume [of] chest and back hair. The complaint is more about [that] the persons are portrayed as ‘gross’ for having large volumes of chest and back hair, that it’s social[ly] normal to be body-shaming people who have large volumes of body hair, and that others should also find it gross. I accept that the advert is in good humour, however some people are quite sensitive to things that are outside of their control. It is on the same level as fat-shaming.” In this case, the ASA deemed the complaint settled after Frank Energy removed the advertisement.
24. AMP. Complainant: “AMP are currently running an advert where they show older (they refer to them as retired) people dining out and when it’s time to pay the bill, it shows two of these retired people trying to skip paying the bill by climbing out of a window. As retired people ourselves, my wife and I find this ad denigrating towards retired people, implying that older people act in a criminal manner by trying to avoid paying their bills while it also appears to send a message that perhaps older people cannot afford to go out for fine dining, which also very insulting. Due diligence should have been done before any ads of this type are produced by way of asking the hospitality industry the demographics of whom of their clientele are more likely to try and skip paying a bill instead of just singling out retired people. I believe this ad needs to be withdrawn and a formal public apology be made by AMP.”
25. ANZ. Complainant: “My friends, family and I all find the depiction of a man in a dress to be deeply disturbing and offensive. Why are you allowing them to promote mental illness? This is extremely concerning considering the exposure to children. You are destroying our communities.”
According to its most recent annual report, the Advertising Standards Authority received 1086 complaints about ads in 2023 – 130 were accepted for review by the complaints board.
ASA chief executive Hilary Souter told Media Insider that the authority had received fewer complaints in 2024 - it’s in the hundreds again, but the final number is still being compiled.
One hundred had been accepted for review.
“In 2024, over 60% of these advertisements were either upheld by the board or settled by the advertiser (the ads were changed or removed).”
There were two main issues that drove complaints: truthful presentation (misleading claims) and social responsibility (including offensiveness, safety, fear and distress and ad placement decisions).
“Digital ads and television commercials are the most complained about mediums, continuing the trend from the last few years,” Souter said.
“Like 2023, advocacy advertising [a wide category that includes ads from interest groups, political advertising and ads from government agencies] continues to be the most complained about ‘product’ category.”
Complaints that were upheld last year included those about the Fat Burning Ninjas health and fitness programme; a billboard for Gun City; a print advertisement for Reality Check Radio; a Hobson’s Pledge ad in the NZ Herald; and a Remedy Coffee poster that showed a woman giving the middle finger.
Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand’s most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor and has a small shareholding in NZME.
Auckland professor's final post accuses political parties of threatening his prospects.