The U.K’s Advertising Standards Authority has been rather ban-happy lately, axing an allegedly “racy” ad with Dakota Fanning and another featuring a model deemed too thin for public viewing. But if you rolled your eyes over either of the previous incidents, steel yourself for the ASA’s most recent crackdown.
The newest ban targets the photo featured above, which is a part of the Miu Miu campaign featuring Hailee Steinfeld. Perhaps you are perplexed as I was at first. Why was this banned? Maybe her heels are too high? Are calves inappropriate now? What about wiping your eyes? Few could make up the true excuse if they tried:
The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that the image…was irresponsible because it depicted a child in an unsafe location.
[via The Telegraph]
Yes, that’s the real-life reason. Apparently Miu Miu’s ad is going to lure children into playing on (possibly abandoned) train tracks. Frankly, I think the more irresponsible message here is that you should go sitting on dirty old metal in a dress that probably costs several of my paychecks.
While there may have been shades of grey in the morality of the previously banned ads, I’m going to go ahead and call absurdity on this one.
Do you think this ad deserves to be banned? Can you think of other advertising campaigns that the ASA should be focusing their energy on instead?
orchid / 222 posts
definitely the dumbest one yet
dahlia / 2747 posts
lol…
daffodil / 1607 posts
they DO have a point… tons of fashiony pictures seem to be taken around a rail road track/train track
however, I think it’s a bit drastic and strange that after years and years of those pictures this one is under fire
rose / 791 posts
it’s a stupid advert anyway. why is she sitting on dirty old train tracks in some posh designer dress? lol.
magnolia / 1369 posts
O__o
they have nothing better to do with themselves, looking at this ad doesn’t make me want to go out and buy the designer’s clothes but i’m not thinking “hmmm, i want to be like Dakota and that other chick – let’s go chill on the train tracks!”
hydrangea / 77 posts
I understand their reason for banning it, but if they’re going to be that strict about ads like this, they should be just as strict about all other ads.
guest
Yes, the LIBTARDS have conquered my ancestral homeland! Woe to the Empire!
guest
@irisbitterman - You understand their reason for banning the ad? I should like to know what you are smoking. Even true fascists wouldn’t touch this.
guest
This Advertising Standards Authority, obviously run by libtarded commie-pinko feminazis should themselves be banned from existence.
guest
-________________________- worse than peta.
guest
Miu Miu needs to find a different person who is 1) Old Enough and 2) Pretty.
guest
I think these companies need to be aware of certain laws regarding photography before sending their pictures to those places. I don’t agree with banning the ad, but I can see where the U.K. is coming from. Many “fashionistia’s” copy photoshoots like these and the U.K. doesn’t want them to be influnced by a possibly dangerous situtation.
sunflower / 352 posts
LOOL , when you said it was stupid, I thought it was gonna be something like, she’s rubbing her eye and it looks like it’s offensive to people who are blind…. and then of course.. they wouldn’t be able to see that ad.
I don’t know where I’m going with this.
It is stupid either way.
guest
I feel smart because when I looked at the picture my first guess was because of where it was. =P I can kinda understand, but a lot of kids already go to train tracks anyway to take “cool” pictures of themselves.
guest
I’m laughing my ass off right now..
guest
what…its like taking pictures in front of the ocean with models…just…wut?
guest
I don’t really understand, because I live in the UK, and the commercials are WAY WORSE than the ones in America. Like… naked people everywhere. It just… doesn’t make sense.
guest
” Frankly, I think the more irresponsible message here is that you should
go sitting on dirty old metal in a dress that probably costs several of
my paychecks.”
I LOL’d
guest
Lol, that is such a silly reason.
guest
All ads, music videos and fashion shoots carry untold stories or hidden messages which unconsciously effecting our minds. In this picture i see an unhappy girl by the railway track who doesn’t look very happy. This world is one big plot and we are all being played by the media and music industry.
guest
well, i agree with the ban on the too-thin ad. if all ads like that were banned then companies would have to stop using emaciated models.
this one is just dumb, though.
daisy / 505 posts
haha when i first saw it i thought she was crying and about to lie down on the train tracks. and then i was like, yeah, too graphic. but then i read the actual reason and i was just like…oh. yeah that reason is kind of dumb. everyone goes on the train tracks at some point to be cool, or because no trains have run for like 100 years. why is she scratching her eye, then? to be edgy? haha. i did think that other ad the girl was too thin though. she looked like she needed some medical support
guest
These are the people you want to have charge of the economy and your private lives.
guest
I don’t agree to banning anything. If you don’t like it, don’t look. Simple as that. People are happy to agree to give others the power to ban things they don’t like, but what about when those bureaucrats start slamming their Paperwork Hammer down on the things YOU enjoy? I’m no fan of Dakota Fanning or too-thin models, but sometimes taking a stand for freedom means taking a stand beside things you don’t approve of yourself. I have so many fond memories of walking down railroad tracks…its sad to think that kids in the Evil Empi–er, I mean England–will never get to do that.
The bastards weren’t quite so scrupuluous when they were dealing drugs to the Chinese less than a hundred years ago.
guest
Lol.. I call shenanigans on this one. My friends & I were posing on train tracks years before this ad made it look delectably “dangerous”. Sorry UK!
guest
LMAO! Now this was stupid.