Vegan TV ad highlighting meat-eaters' hypocrisy banned after UK viewers complained of distressing images
NEWS: The commercial, created by advocacy organisation Vegan Friendly UK sought to highlight the disconnect between people saying they care about animals but still eat them - but many did not want to see it.
A television commercial created by a pro-vegan organisation has been banned by the advertising watchdog for causing distress to viewers.
The ad, created by Vegan Friendly UK, sought to highlight the hypocrisy of meat-eaters who say they care about welfare issues, calling on them to make the connection between the food on their plate and animal suffering.
It shows three adults sitting around a table eating animal products and discussing animal-related social issues. One discusses how plastic pollution in the ocean affects fish, meanwhile another highlights how other countries have wet markets, showing 'they don't care about animals like we do'.
Intercut with their conversation is footage of animal agriculture, including fish being butchered, a dying sow next to her piglet, and a cow crying. Close-up shots of the actors' mouths, as they consume meat, highlight the connection between eating animals and animal suffering.
As the characters' hypocrisy dawns on them, a look of horror appears on their faces, and the words 'make the connection' appear on the screen, alongside the statement 'no animal was harmed, consumed, or purchased to make this advert'.
While the commercial is fairly explicit in showing the character's moment of enlightenment, unfortunately, some 63 viewers were not able to make the same connection and contacted the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) to voice their consternation.
Among the complaints received was one saying that the advert features gratuitous violence to animals and that this caused viewers unnecessary distress. The ad, which was broadcast in March, also received complaints from people who claimed it 'vilified meat-eaters'.
The third class of complaint revolved around whether the clip has been appropriately scheduled, as it was broadcast when children could be watching. Prior to being aired, it had been handed a scheduling restriction, preventing it from being broadcast around programmes commissioned for, principally directed at or likely to appeal to children under 16.
Defending its commercial, Vegan Friendly denied that it vilified meat-eaters, and argued that any offence it did cause was justified by the billions of animals who are slaughtered annually by the meat industry. Additionally, it noted, the editing of the clip was designed to motivate behavioural change, rather than vilify.
With regards to the complaint that young people may see the ad, Vegan Friendly highlighted that the commercial was specifically scheduled not to air around children's programmes.
In terms of the distressing imagery, the organisation said the stock footage it sourced did not portray actions of violence or harm. Such images, it noted, can be seen in butchers or fishmongers on Britain’s high streets.
Indeed, it said, the clips had been carefully chosen because they 'would not feel out of place in a cooking programme or a nature documentary', saying this kind of imagery has been 'normalised'.
The group's defence was supported by media organisation Clearcast, which works with advertisers to make sure content will pass ASA restrictions.
According to Clearcast, it felt the 'imagery was not overly graphic and that the strongest clip in the ad was the skinned cow’s head'.
In terms of whether the commercial vilified meat-eaters, Clearcast said it did not, and instead called on viewers to 'connect the products being eaten with the animals themselves, and the wider context which might include ecological, welfare or human rights concerns'.
According to the ASA: "[Clearcast] said that, although blood could be seen in the ad, the clips of fish were seen in the context of being prepared for consumption. They considered this style of imagery was similar to what could be expected to be seen in markets, butchers and fishmongers.
"Since these clips were interspersed with other clips showing pigs and cows that did not show mistreatment, they did not consider that gratuitous violence was shown or that the imagery was graphic enough to warrant a more stringent scheduling restriction."
When ruling on Vegan Friendly UK's advert, the ASA decided that it did not vilify meat-eaters.
Its ruling stated: "We considered that the ad would be seen in the context of Vegan Friendly’s wider aim to increase peoples' consumption of plant-based food, by imploring them to think about the relationship between meat and animals being killed, rather than explicitly vilifying meat-eaters.
"We considered that was reinforced by the tagline ‘make the connection’ at the end of the ad."
However, it upheld the two complaints: one about scheduling, and one that the ad was likely to cause distress to viewers due to some of the imagery, as well as the way it was edited.
The ASA said: "We acknowledged that some clips which showed meat or fish being prepared for consumption, such as the fish being filleted, would not be out of place on food programmes or when purchasing meat or fish.
"However, we considered that several of the clips shown, such as the clips which depicted animals in distress or the skinned cow’s head, would likely not be seen in these places. In addition, visiting a butcher or watching a cookery programme was an active choice which came with different expectations to those of TV ads."
Taking to Instagram following the ruling, Vegan Friendly said the advert had made the impact it had set out to make.
It said: "Our AD was simply shedding light on the harsh and brutal reality millions of farm animals endure every day, and it was banned because it made some viewers uncomfortable."This was the exact reaction we were hoping for. The discomfort a viewer could feel from watching the advert is only a fraction of what farm animals experience every day. "We will not stop being a voice for the animals and advocating veganism to promote equality for all living things."
As a result of the ruling, the ad must not be broadcast again in its current form. Additionally, the ASA has told Vegan Friendly UK to ‘avoid using imagery which was likely to cause distress to both younger and adult audiences’.
Maria Chiorando is an MSc student and freelance journalist. Her work has been published by national and regional outlets including Surge, Plant Based News, Vegan Food & Living, the Guardian and Kent on Sunday.
Your support makes a huge difference to us. Supporting Surge with a monthly or one-off donation enables us to continue our work to end all animal oppression.
LATEST ARTICLES