Distillers release new ad code report
Pub Date: 5/1/2006
The Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S. (DISCUS) announced several new media buying and ad placement updates to its advertising and marketing Code in the organization's third public report of advertising complaints released March 20.
The latest semi-annual public report details complaints about seven alcohol advertisements for the period of July 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005, as well as the actions taken by the industry's internal review board and the response by each advertiser.
"This most recent public report describes a number of new measures designed to further strengthen the Code and its guiding principle of responsible advertising directed to adults," said DISCUS President and CEO Peter Cressy.
The new measures highlighted in the report include:
- Independent demographic survey of unmeasured magazines.
In response to a situation where conflicting demographic data was provided to advertisers by the publisher of a magazine not measured by MRI 12+ or Simmons, the Board developed an initiative to require unmeasured magazines to furnish to potential beverage alcohol advertisers demographic survey data conducted by an independent third-party.
- Semi-annual post audits of ad placements
Placement guidelines now require, at a minimum, semi-annual post audits for advertisements placed or aired after Jan. 1, 2006 to verify past placements met the Code's 70 percent 21+ demographic standard. Previously, periodic audits were required.
- Special bindings for school, college and university library subscription copies of Newsweek, People, Sports Illustrated, Time, and
U.S. News & World Report.
Effective July 1, 2006, DISCUS members will instruct publishers to remove their ads from school, college and university library subscription copies of these magazines. In doing so, DISCUS member companies voluntarily will refrain from advertising on the inside and back covers of all editions of these magazines (premium advertising space) if their covers cannot be segregated out for special bindings of these library copies.
The report also includes a section on recent Code Review Board activities, which highlights the Board's involvement in helping to stop irresponsible alcohol marketing campaigns by third parties, even if they fell outside the purview of the DISCUS Code. Among those highlighted in the report are:
- R.J. Reynolds promotion that may have "condoned excessive drinking."
The report said the Code Review Board received an inquiry from three state attorneys general regarding a R.J. Reynolds promotion. Both the Code Review Board and the attorneys general condemned the unauthorized campaign. These joint efforts led to Reynolds' decision to end the promotion.
- Third-party retail department store promotions/brand-logoed
apparel.
The Board received several complaints about beverage alcohol brand-logoed T-shirts in retail department stores' "Back to School" advertising circulars, and a few inquiries about department stores' web-site displays and in-store T-shirt displays.
While the actions of third-party retailers fall outside the scope of the code, once DISCUS member companies learned of these placements, they contacted the department stores to obtain their assurances that such inappropriate placements would not occur in the future.
Separately, DISCUS members have undertaken an in-depth review of the controls in their respective licensing agreements to help ensure that branded apparel are marketed to individuals of legal purchase age.
The DISCUS 70-year-old Code of Responsible Practices for Beverage Alcohol Advertising and Marketing provides for a Code Review Board, comprised of senior member company representatives, that is charged with reviewing complaints about advertising and marketing materials in the marketplace. Additionally, the Code has an advisory board made up of outside independent experts from academia, government and broadcasting.
The first complaint was filed by "third party" organizations and noted poker champion and celebrity Chris Moneymaker had signed autographs for persons under the age of 21 at a promotional event for Canadian Club whiskey.
The Code Review Board agreed the promotion violated an overriding principle of the ad code to market beverage alcohol to adults (only) in a responsible manner. The advertiser investigated, then took measures to make sure company "representatives on site would intercede to avoid similar circumstances in the future."
Another complaint came from a member of the public who objected to a Captain Morgan rum advertisement which the complainant believed violated the code's provision that alcohol marketing or advertising should not "contain claims or representations that individuals can attain social or professional success as a result of beverage alcohol consumption."
The advertisement in question depicted a dentist or dental assistant with a patient reclined in the chair. The board reviewed the complaint and found the advertisement "does not relate to consumption of the product"...and that the advertisement "does not depict drinking Captain Morgan or any other beverage alcohol product" and was thus not in violation of the code and so no action was required.
A public official in Maine complained that a Patron tequila advertisement appeared in newsstand versions of ESPN The Magazine which did not meet the code's readership standard that limits advertising to media that reach a 70 percent or more adult audience. The advertiser said it relied on information from the magazine publisher, which in fact differed from other credible demographic information. The advertiser informed the board they would discontinue placements in ESPN The Magazine.
An advertisement from Skyy Vodka drew the ire of an undisclosed industry member and a member of the public. It depicted "images of arms and legs shown holding drinks in a celebratory toast" which the complainants thought violated the code's prohibition against alcohol advertising that would "rely upon sexual prowess or sexual success as a selling point...and should not depict graphic or gratuitous nudity...promiscuity or sexually lewd or indecent images."
The Code Review Board wound up split on the issue and referred the complaint to their Outside Advisory Panel which did not find the advertising in violation, but did warn that the advertising "was very close to the line" and the review board agreed, urging the advertiser take that into account when developing future campaigns.
Another Skyy advertisement, this time a billboard, caught the attention of a citizen. It depicted a fully clothed male pouring vodka into a glass held by a woman in a dress on a swimming pool float.
The complainant said the illustration violated the code's prohibitions against: degrading the image, form or status of women; associating a product with abusive or violent relationships; depicting situations where alcohol is being consumed excessively or in an irresponsible manner; or relies upon sexual prowess or sexual success or depict promiscuity."
The board determined the advertisement did none of that and so was not in violation of the code.
Tommy Guns Vodka, not a DISCUS member, also had its advertising called into question by an industry member who feared it violated the code's prohibitions against advertising that associated adult beverages with violent situations, implied illegal activity or was associated with anti-social or dangerous activity.
The board found "the use of a gun-shaped bottle and the depiction of guns and bullet holes in the Tommy Gun Vodka advertising implied violent, illegal activity and found the advertisements in violation of the code." There was no further response from the advertiser and the board continues to urge the advertiser to revise the advertising and marketing.
Another manufacturer, Ivanabitch Vodka, was found in violation of numerous code provisions including: lewd and indecent language; a degrading depiction of the image, form or status of women; did not conform to generally accepted standards of good taste; and depicted situations where alcohol was being consumed excessively or in an irresponsible manner.
In addition, the Review Board agreed the marketing violated the code's principle prohibiting marketing in a way that primarily appeals to persons below the legal age through its web-site references to dorm rooms and its spring break promotions.
There was no response from the advertiser and the board continues to urge the advertiser to make revisions.
The distilled spirits industry's approach to self-regulation, pointed to as a model for other industries by the Federal Trade Commission, has been commended on numerous occasions by regulators, industry watchdogs and the media.
To view the report, go to: , and to view the DISCUS Code of Responsible Practices for Beverage Alcohol Advertising and Marketing, go to .