ASA/ Cycling advert/ You just couldn't make it up...

[albion]

The weird thing is that the Scottish safety ad chose to be real, the ASA wanted something more like an advert.
Choosing not to be real surely puts real cyclists at even more risk.

The other thing to note is that riding down the middle is what happens, especially so with horses. Therefore that middle riding was a way to make people 'think horse'.


http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jan/29/cycling-scotland-advert-banned

"The Advertising Standards Agency's ruling goes against everything we're trying to do to normalise cycling as an everyday activity and make it a priority form of transport," said Martin Key"

 

[Spinney]

On the other hand, there was this comment on the BBC article:

 

[Bman]

I would like to complain about the ruling reported in the below BBC article
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572
The statement made by the ASA is unfounded, uneducated and wholly preposterous.
Firstly, wearing a cycle helmet is not a requirement, using The Highway Code as an excuse to enforce this ruling is laughable at the least. How many motor adverts depict the vehicle being driven in a way that contravenes The Highway Code? Well, most of them.
I would like to point you to another “advisory” in The Highway Code; rule 152:
“You should drive slowly and carefully on streets where there are likely to be pedestrians, cyclists and parked cars.”
Would you say that the vehicle in this advert is following The Highway Code?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=l2YGPczhjYE
This is just one example, take some time on youtube to review some of the adverts from the motor industry, how are these adverts allowed to air when you uphold a complaint from just 5 people who do not understand how to cycle safely on our roads?
Again, I point you to a previous decision by the ASA that allowed a Vauxhall advert to continue to be aired, even though it depicted passengers holding flares out of the windows as the car was moving.
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/1148341/
Explain to me how this is acceptable yet a young lady, riding in a safe and sensible fashion, is not!?
This is just helping to perpetuate the myth that cycling is a dangerous activity and should not inconvenience motorists. This attitude is the reason many motorists dislike cyclists and in extreme situations, punish and further endanger those venerable users by their over inflated sense of entitlement.
IT IS A CYCLISTS RESPONSIBILTY AND DECISION TO CHOOSE WHERE IN THE ROAD IS THE SAFEST PLACE TO PROCEED – NOT THE FOLLOWING MOTORIST OR THE ASA!
You are walking on thin ice with this statement as you are actively encouraging bad and illegal behaviour from motorists based on your statements.
Will you be taking responsibility over any future accident caused by a cyclist following your advice and cycling in a door zone or gutter? What about a cyclist who injures their neck due to wearing a helmet that may or may not be fit for purpose? After all, you say it is socially unacceptable to do otherwise.
Your whole ruling and statement in regards to this decision is “socially unacceptable”.

It seems to have lost its formatting, but oh well.

 

[Rickshaw Phil]

On the other hand, there was this comment on the BBC article:
View attachment 37128

I had wondered about that. Not living in Scotland I'd likely never have seen the ad without this controversy.

 

[Huan Andol]

Can anyone remember the advert a few years ago for a car. Which had a load of cyclists riding around a city. probably without helmets and obviously really far from the edge of the road. Hmmm.. what was it.

Citroen C4.

http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1...-foul-watchdogs-concern-kids/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH

 

[albion]

" the scene in the ad is fantastical and set apart from reality,"
So it seems to me the ASA is choosing to be set apart from reality.

It is a very dangerous move to ban instructing on what is in fact reality.

 

[gaz]

Found another write up of it as well. http://lofidelitybicycleclub.co.uk/trading-standards/

 

[Sore Thumb]

 

[Sore Thumb]

Don't forget to tweet your concerns to the ASA twitter account.

 

[asterix]

Have signed the petition:

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...e-than-0-5-metres-from-the-parking-lane#share

 

[asterix]

They will ignore it. They will only respond to 'appeals' from the original complainant or respondent.

I've had run ins with the ASA in the past, when I worked in the regulatory sector. They have a habit of making up the law as they go along and I got to the stage of actually having to threaten judicial review to get them to to acknowledge that their decision was contrary to the law...

Well I can always start a campaign of complaints against adverts of all kinds for equally specious reasons.

 

[albion]

In that they respond to '5 complaints' and 'only 1 complaint', it looks like as often as not complaints are a route to their own agenda.

A kind of automation makes things easier for them.

 

[GetAGrip]

Petition signed. 419 more sigs. needed

 

[semislickstick]

But how can anyone say she was too far out when it only shows the view from behind, the viewer, from that angle has no idea if she about to avoid any amount of hazards coming up. Are they treating her as the stupid unskilled cyclist? Sexist barstewards! I'm making a complaint!!

 

[oldstrath]

Well I can always start a campaign of complaints against adverts of all kinds for equally specious reasons.

Presumably they would wish to ban any adverts that show cars overtaking anything at all, because it involves changing lanes. Certainly pretty much every car advert involves showing behaviours which are contrary to the Highway Code. be interesting to see if they had the balls to ban any of them - probably not, but worth a try.