A digital poster for H&M, displayed on 30 January 2012, showed three images of David Beckham. One image featured David Beckham wearing only a pair of trunk briefs. Issue
Three complainants objected to the ad.
- Three complainants challenged whether the ad was offensive.
- Two complainants challenged whether the ad was irresponsible, because it contained material that they said was unsuitable for children to see.
ASA Assessment: Complaints Not Upheld
- The ASA noted that there was no explicit nudity in the image, and that the ad was for an underwear range. We considered that the nature of the product meant viewers of the ad were less likely to regard the ad as gratuitous or offensive, and considered that the poses and facial expressions of David Beckham were mildly sexual at most. While we acknowledged that some viewers might consider the images distasteful, we concluded the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.
On this point we investigated the ad under CAP Code rule 4.1 (Harm and Offence) but did not find it in breach.
- Because the ad was for an underwear range, was not overtly sexual and did not feature explicit nudity, we considered the ad was not unsuitable for children to see, and concluded it was not socially irresponsible.
On this point we investigated the ad under CAP Code rule 1.3 (Social responsibility) but did not find it in breach.