Primo Moon Hopper Moments in NZ
And now for a Primo moment from New Zealand, brought to you by Fonterra and Saatchi & Saatchi New Zealand. A young man pushing a shopping trolley full of melons and chocolate flavoured Primo milk through a supermarket car park is stunned to discover three women in pink and red bikinis bouncing on moon hoppers. All of a sudden they lose their balance. A voiceover says, “Looks like they’re losing focus. Could be feeling a bit peckish. A Primo should do the trick…”
The Advertising Standards Complaints Board in New Zealand at two different times in 2007 considered complaints that the Primo Moment ad is degrading to women, using sexual references that have nothing to do with the product. Two principles were considered in their deliberation.
Basic Principle 5
Advertisements should not employ sexual appeal in a manner which is exploitive and degrading of any individual or group of people in society to promote the sale of products or services. In particular people should not be portrayed in a manner which uses sexual appeal simply to draw attention to an unrelated product. Children must not be portrayed in a manner which treats them as objects of sexual appeal
Basic Principle 6
Humour and satire are natural and accepted features of the relationship between individuals and groups within the community. Humorous and satirical treatment of people and groups of people is acceptable, provided that, taking into account generally prevailing community standards, the portrayal is not likely to cause serious or widespread offence, hostility, contempt, abuse or ridicule.
The Complaints Board noted that it essentially contained a hyperbolic message about the renergising properties of Primo. The Complaints Board took into account the manner in which both the young man and the women had been portrayed, both in terms of dress and behaviour, and the far-fetched and unlikely nature of the scenario, which some said was light-hearted and amusing.
The Complaints Board acknowledged the concern of the complainants, but was of the view that the advertisement did not meet the threshold to be said to use sex to sell an unrelated product, or to cause serious or widespread offence, in the light of generally prevailing community standards. Accordingly, the Complaints Board ruled that it was not in breach of Basic Principles 5 or 6 of the Code for People in Advertising.