'Masturbating' Lingerie Advertisement Banned
 

(submitted by gekkogecko)
Oddly Enough - Reuters to My Yahoo!

LONDON (Reuters) - A magazine advertisement for
lingerie that showed a scantily clad model apparently
masturbating was banned by Britain's Advertising
Standards Authority (ASA) Wednesday for being
offensive.

The ad for model Elle Macpherson's range of lingerie,
which appeared in Vogue fashion magazine, featured a
woman seen through a keyhole with her thumbs inside
her underpants. The woman's face cannot be seen.

"The Authority considered that, because it implied the
woman was masturbating, the advertisement was likely
to cause serious or widespread offence," the ASA said
in a statement after receiving a complaint.

It said the advertisers had been asked not to repeat
the approach. Vogue said it received no complaints
about the ad.

Bendon UK, the company behind Macpherson's lingerie
range, said the advertisement depicted an intimate
moment and that the photograph was "feminine,
luxurious and stylized."

In 2000, the ASA ordered French designer Yves Saint
Laurent to remove billboards for its Opium perfume
that showed alabaster-skinned supermodel Sophie Dahl
reclining in the nude.

Lilith,

“The better part of valour is discretion, in the which better part I have saved my life.”
William Shakespeare, ‘King Henry the Fourth, Part I’ (Falstaff, Act V, Scene IV)

The ASA has, by banning a commercial, the showing of which might result in developments similar to what has come to pass here in the States, preserved English freedoms we Americans are in the process of losing. The grossly irresponsible behaviors of Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake have done a disservice to freedom of expression.

Given their recorded talents, it is likely that in 20 years time, the only reference to either will be in legal tomes as footnotes to yet another law encroaching on what had been traditional freedoms.

Interesting perspective, jseal.

(BTW, I like the term tomes instead of books. You bring class to the threads! ;))

YEAH!… Class! ……………(now all we need is some classy readers.:confused: )












;)

dicksbro,

Thank you for your kind words. Alas, as we know, self restrain is not an American forte.

I was gonna add a pic of the ad, but I guess you can't in here?

Anyhow, when I saw it, the thought that she might be masturbating never crossed my mind, to be honest!

Where can a guy find a keyhole like that? :D

I have to differ with your opinion JSeal I don't believe that Janet Jackson did anything wrong . More risque images are on the media everyday .I was watching that program and never realized that that image was in any way offensive till the media took the image and splashed it out of context endlessly
What we have is a media that had a technology that they wanted to use and found a example to shove time delay down our throat .no longer will CNN be able to get a raw story to the public without the scrutony(sp) of the powers that be....

way22hot,

We disagree. Fair enough. Hey, that’s what keeps it interesting!

The covering of Ms. Jackson’s right breast was secured by snaps. Snaps are designed to be used, and reused. Had the inner, red bodice been intended to remain intact, it would have been designed to do so. It was not so designed. I think it is fair to conclude then that Ms. Jackson and Mr. Timberlake knew what was to happen. So much for their truthfulness.

Both of the performers were aware that many millions of people would be watching their performance. Both of the performers were aware that a large fraction of their audience would be young. Indeed, they play to a younger, rather than an older audience. WildIrish posted that he was away from the television during their performance. While anecdotal, this gives credence to this proposition.

Both performers were aware that millions of parents who would allow their children to watch NFL contests also would not allow their children to watch a woman have a man tear off her clothing and expose her breast. These two forced their behavior on millions of people who would otherwise have not watched him do that to her. The only reason those millions of people did watch him do that to her was because they did not anticipate such an event occurring during a professional football game.

In re the time delay technology: I think you are getting the cart before the horse. Companies which want to make money try to keep costs down. Introducing an additional layer of editing, with the required additional costs in equipment and staff is not at all in their interests. To accept your theory (shove time delay down our throat) at face value, I’d have to assume that Ms. Jackson and Mr. Timberlake were in cahoots with “the powers that be”. Sorry, but I find that conspiracy theory extremely unlikely.

Ms. Jackson’s and Mr. Timberlake’s behavior was out of context and inappropriate. While it may be true that more risqué images are on the media everyday, it is most decidedly not true that you can see them at an NFL game. Bare tits are not what one expects to be on display at the Superbowl.

As a result, the wheels of state, which grind exceeding fine, have started moving – and it is your freedoms and my freedoms which will be ground down some more. You are quite correct to worry that “no longer will CNN be able to get a raw story to the public”.

You should worry.

I have no doubt that Ms. Jackson planned to expose herself on TV for a period measured in seconds.I don't believe that she in anyway expected it to become the endless parade of the image,enlarged 1,000 fold
In noway do I believe that Ms Jackson or any other person involved in the production of that show was involved in a conspiracy. It is more like being at the wrong place at the wrong time .Sooner or later some event would of become the catylast to install time delay

Gentlefolk,

In re American loss versus English management,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3613555.stm

A rose goes to Britain's Advertising Standards Authority.

And why can't you add it in here? We have plenty of much more explicit items than that...or were you making a joke... sorry!:) I guess it probably is copyrighted, silly me. I'm going to go to sleep now, goodnight.

http://www.ananova.com/entertainmen.../sm_879702.html

(The banned ad)

dicksbro,

Thanks for the details.

While I may be characterized as a knuckle dragging antediluvian Neanderthal, I think the advertisement contains several features that justify the interpretation which brought about the ban.