Nice Areas Shane!

Shane Warne has spun into a spot of bother following his endorsement of hair restorer. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said that the TV advert for Advanced Hair Studio is in breach of advertising guidelines which forbid celebrity endorsement of medicines. As a result, the advert may not be shown in the UK.

Shane, probably the finest spin bowler ever to grace a cricket pitch, was quoted in the advert saying: "Warnie, Warnie, Warnie. I've been hearing it for years but to me I've always taken it as warning."

In small text, the advert made reference to Advanced Laser Therapy (ALT), which uses a medicine, Minoxidil. The ASA said viewers could have inferred that Warne was endorsing ALT and ordered the company behind the advert to withdraw any mention of the treatment in adverts featuring Warne.

The specific area of the Advertising Code that it breached was the TV Code’s Section 8.2.17 Celebrity Testimonials and Presentations. It states that:

“No advertisement for a medicinal product or treatment may include a testimonial by a person well known in public life, sport, entertainment etc, or be presented by such a person.”

This ruling throws up three interesting issues.

Firstly, if Warne’s advert on the TV was in breach of the code, then why were his previous press adverts (and those also endorsed previously by Graham Gooch) not in breach? TV advertising and press advertising are ruled by separate codes, but the CAP Non-Broadcast Code Section 50.17 states:

“Marketers should not use health professionals or celebrities to endorse medicines.”

Secondly, it seems that if the medicine were not mentioned and instead Warne had just endorsed the Studio itself, then it would have been OK. However, this in turn would seem to breach the TV Code’s Section 8.2.4 Mandatory Information:

“Advertisements for medicinal products must include the following information:

(a) the name of the product
(b) the name of the active ingredient, if it contains only one
(c) the indication (ie what the product is for)
(d) wording such as ‘always read the label’ or ‘always read the leaflet’ as appropriate”

It would seem that the advert was banned because it tried to fit in with another part of the Code.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, surely the advert should have been banned for being plain awful! I have to confess that I haven’t seen it, but it does contain the statement: “Warnie, Warnie, Warnie. I've been hearing it for years but to me I've always taken it as 'warning."

Surely this is an affront to public decency?

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment
Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article. Personal verbal attacks will be deleted. Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed. Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button. Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Comment:
Code:*
	I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments