It was then revealed that the true hero behind the meal was actually the daughter’s new boyfriend, who turned out to be the butcher.
A recently released decision by the authority said the complainant believed the ad portrayed the man as an “incompetent liar”.
“The clear implication is that men are incompetent and unable to cook, and resort to lying about it, where cooking is an activity traditionally associated with females,” the complainant said.
“The man cooking is using beef kebabs purchased from a New World butcher, while stating they are his own creation. The guest for dinner is the New World butcher.
“This advertisement clearly denigrates men on the basis of their gender; the excuse would be that this is common in ads, to imply that men are incompetent at cooking and other household tasks, and that it is in some way acceptable or funny to denigrate men.”
The complainant believed the ad violated advertising standards principles.
Foodstuffs said it supported the authority’s review and decision.
“The New World ‘Meat the Parents’ ad was designed to be light-hearted and relatable, showing how good food can bring people together,” a spokesperson said.
“We know food plays an important role in our homes, from everyday meals to milestone occasions, and we wanted to show the skill of our New World butchers with a warm story Kiwis can relate to.”
According to the decision, the authority’s complaints board considered the context, medium and audience of an advertisement that has been complained about, the product or service being advertised and, when applicable, generally prevailing community standards.
The chairman also considered decisions about similar issues or advertising.
In this case, it ruled the New World ad had not breached the standards and it would not take further action.
Authority chief executive Hilary Souter said whether an ad was accepted for consideration by the complaints board depended on whether the consumer’s concern regarding the ad was likely to reach the threshold to breach one or more of the advertising codes.
“A no further action ruling means the chair of the complaints board has reviewed the complaint and has ruled a code has not been breached, and no further action is required.
“This outcome may occur when a complaint is about an extreme interpretation, is not substantive, or if there is a precedent decision that relates to the same or similar advertising.”
Al Williams is an Open Justice reporter for the New Zealand Herald, based in Christchurch. He has worked in daily and community titles in New Zealand and overseas for the last 16 years. Most recently he was editor of the Hauraki-Coromandel Post, based in Whangamatā. He was previously deputy editor of the Cook Islands News.
