TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 9 °C Thursday 23 May, 2013

Advertising standards body: No, you can’t look at Club Orange’s naughty bits

The Advertising Standards Authority upholds complaints against the outdoor versions of Club Orange’s ‘bits’ ads.

Image: YouTube screengrab

IRELAND’S ADVERTISING WATCHDOG has upheld complaints against Club Orange over its tongue-in-cheek adverts inviting viewers to sample its ‘bits’.

The Advertising Standards Authority of Ireland upheld complaints against the outdoor bus shelter versions of the advertisements, which feature women wearing tight and revealing clothing – carrying oranges – and asking the viewer whether they want to ‘get their hands on our bits’.

The body said the imagery of the ad, where oranges were intended to represent women’s breasts, had been combined with the suggestive headline of ‘the best bits’ to use sexual innuendo “merely to attract attention, as there was no tangible link between a pair of women’s breasts and the brand Club Orange”.

The investigation had followed complaints that the ads were not suitable for public display, with one complainant arguing that women standing at a bus shelter might feel uncomfortable doing so if the ad was displayed there.

Club had defended the ads, saying the ‘bits’ were a well-known part of the Club Orange product which the ads had sought to accentuate. It added that the Club Orange brand was “known for its quirky and unconventional sense of humour”.

“They stated that the advertisement did not contain graphic imagery but used light-hearted innuendo in an attempt to draw attention to the natural ingredients included in the product,” the ASAI said in its summary of the complaint.

“They also did not consider that the use of outdoor media was inappropriate for this campaign.”

The decision means the ads must now be edited or withdrawn – though because the complaints were only made against the outdoor version of the ads, and not the more widely-known TV equivalent, the broadcast versions are still cleared for air.


(YouTube credit: )

Other complaints upheld included those against Ryanair, who were found to have advertised an air fare which transpired not to be available when customers tried to take it up. In that instance, Ryanair was invited to submit a response to the complaint, but declined the opportunity.

An Eircom radio ad was also criticised for mistakenly referring to 8Mb (megabit) broadband as an 8MB (megabyte) service, meaning the advert claimed that the service was up to eight times faster than it actually was.

A complaint against a TV ad for DoneDeal.ie – where a viewer had complained that an ad, in which a woman sells her husband, had depicted slavery or human trafficking – was rejected, however.

The ASAI said that while human trafficking was naturally a real and serious issue, the situation portrayed in the ad “was so unrealistic” that it was “not intended to be an endorsement of a particular type of behaviour”.

Similarly rejected was a complaint against ads for Lynx deodorant lampooning the fictitious complaint of ‘premature perspiration’. The complainant unsuccessfully argued that the advertisement portrayed sweating “as something other than a natural bodily function”.

Read next:

Comments (97 Comments)

  • Who complains about these things? Seriously get a life!!

    Reply
    • Margaret Hayes? maybe.

      Reply
    • I agree, so I’ll post this comment drawing attention to the futility of pointless complaints.
      Err um, hang on…

      Reply
    • only a fossilised eunuch would complain !!!

      Reply
    • Me.

      I once successfully complained about an inaccurate Ryanair billboard ad for my own smug sense of satisfaction, because I was bored in the airport, and to take a puck at Ryanair.

      Reply
    • I find it so hard to believe that people would actually complain about this. In fact, I’d probably find it more plausible that the whole thing has been constructed by Club Orange to get free media attention.

      In the early days of Ryanair’s rise to dominance they ran a promotional price in Germany of €69 return. In a cunning move to avoid advertising costs they designed a poster with the numbers 6 & 9 printed on the base of two feet. In between the feet was the top view of a head. Ryanair placed this on one or two billboards in Germany, which lasted all of about 2 or 3 hours before they were told to remove. They were fined a relatively small amount for what was judged to be a crude advertisement. However, Ryanair cleverly sent the image to every newspaper and media source in Germany who in turn reported on the incident, image included.

      Net result: People saw cheap flights and Ryanair paid f’ all prime newspaper advertisement. Maybe Club are doing something similar, getting extra value out of an advert that’s already been going for quite to some.

      Reply
  • I have a much bigger issue with ads using scientific jargon and graphs to claim they do things that they don’t… who decided what the 7 signs of ageing are? Ads using innuendo and sexual imagery are fine if they don’t lie… ads that make false claims should be clamped down on.

    Reply
    • That’s my pet peeve too.. The small print reveals that the whole ad is bunk..

      80% of dermatologists agree*
      (*small number of dermatologists asked, even smaller number responded – therefore a pathetically small number of dermatologists did in fact recommend this product)

      This range of shampoo, conditioner and hair masque makes your hair stronger*
      (*than if you just used shampoo alone)

      Show stopping eyelashes! False lash effect mascara!*
      (*filmed using “lash inserts” or false eyelashes, or “enhanced in post production” – photoshopped to us mere mortals)

      This helps you lose weight!*
      (*as part of a calorie controlled, balanced diet – which would cause you to lose weight anyway)

      I could go on all day.. The brazen misuse of statistics, people in white coats and science-y sounding things used to bamboozle consumers.. It’s disgraceful.

      Although I have to admit l-casei-made-up-bacteria in incredibly sugary dairy produce has to be my favourite, they even had their own brand of science!

      Reply
  • They should of made a Club Melon

    Reply
  • Barry 11/09/12 #

    How are these adverts any different to the Diet Coke adverts that ran for years with topless men cleaning windows, carry water or other such nonsense,?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Sre-wpGHE

    women very openly lusting after men, if the advert features a women being lusted after in the same manner you can be damn sure they’d be complaints

    Reply
    • did that frighten you Barry, women visibly lusting after men? LOL

      Reply
    • Very good point Barry

      Reply
    • Barry 11/09/12 #

      mary o brien, to be honest I personally couldn’t give a monkeys about either advert,

      I’m merely pointing out how idiotic the complaints made by women about the club orange advert are when you compare it to other adverts.

      Reply
    • A buffed, waxed and tanned man drinking DIET coke? BAN IT!

      Reply
    • barry, now many ads use mens testicles to sell crap? How many ads use mens penises/bodies to sell crap? Yet 24/7 womens bodies are used to sell anything and everything. How many male pop stars open their legs and flash us their bits to sell a rubbish pop song? Womens bodies have been used from time. Now the advertisers are moving onto men having harvested the cash from women.

      To be honest I will not be surprised the day I see a non hairy fanny being used to sell me oranges. It is the next logical step in the harvesting of body parts by the advertisers.

      Reply
    • It’s not sexism when it’s women gawking. God no, not possible.

      Reply
    • Barry 11/09/12 #

      mary o brien,

      Look at all the cleaning adverts that feature women cleaning…don’t hear uproar from you over them though, are you happy with women being portrayed like this?

      We all know men are well capable of doing such jobs and do on a daily basis….unless of course you are with a man who is happy for a women to do all the work and the women is content to do so.

      I’d see this as a far bigger issue imho,

      Reply
    • @barry, I agree with you re cleaning ads. The infantilization of men in ads is shocking especially in the domain that is considered womens work. It is insulting to men especially these days when as you say they are just as likely to do their bit round the house as the woman.

      But that does not take away from my point that womens bodies are more routinely used than mens to sell us crap we dont need.

      Reply
    • They’re not different, and that ad probably shouldve been banned. That it wasnt doesnt mean this shouldnt.

      Reply
  • Stop the (head)lights! Orange ya glad there’s no tangible link between a pair of women’s breasts and the brand Club Orange!

    Reply
  • If journal.ie cared to research their ‘news article’ they would see that the ad that was actually banned for Club Orange, was nothing like the TV ad, or not even from the same campaign.It was two oranges on a black background – not a boob in sight. Obviously having two oranges side by side now is morally disturbing for kids nowadays.

    Reply
  • Ah for fux sake, they’re some of the funniest ads about. Get a life!

    Reply
  • What’s interesting is that almost everyone’s talking about the Club Orange ad and ignoring the Ryanair and Eircom ads, even though the Eircom and Ryanair ads were deliberately lying and misleading potential customers. Is that not a more important story?

    Reply
  • Some people have way to much time on their hands…

    Reply
  • There was a beautiful pair of tits bouncing around my back garden this morning :) as mrs slocombe would say its a wonder I’m here at all my pussy got soaking wet I had to dry it in front of the fire before I left. http://www.gracebrothers.net/mrs_slocombes_pussy_quotes.htm

    Reply
  • Disregarding the merit of the actual advertisements for a moment, why is it OK for Abercrombie to drape a colossal posted of a topless man with a suggestive hand under his jeans but it’s not OK for Club Orange to use breasts as the focal point for an ad? Surely the link between a man wearing no clothes and a clothes store is as tenuous as the link between breasts and an orange soft drink?

    Reply
    • men being used as sexual objects is a new thing isn’t it? Along with the new regime of pressure on men to look good, wax, work out etc etc. It is interesting though that this whataboutery is used to deflect criticism from ads which use womens body parts to sell rubbish. This has been going on so long, no one thinks anything about it.

      In the end men will end up the same as women, being judged by the sum of their parts instead and that is sad. My son does be stressing because he is really skinny and does not have the physique of abercrombie guy, or diet coke guy.

      Capitalism needs to drive on and on and on. Next stop babies in high heels, I kid you not.

      Reply
    • Who ever said it was ok? (aside from the hboards of idiots above who seem to think that these advertisements are funny and harmless)

      Reply
    • Mmmmmm Abercrombie men……………yummy ……….

      Reply
  • ‘Women standing near a bus shelter might feel uncomfortable’. That’s an important consideration in fairness. Some people take things far too seriously at times in this country.

    Reply
  • Its mostly people from rival ad companies that submit these complaints, thereby hitting the profit margins of, say Club orange, Britivic or whoever. Its a cheap lame-lass trick and they’re been at it for years. And, Mark, with respect you are completely deluded if you think you can negotiate your way through life ignoring adverts. Even if you lived in North Korea, you’d be wondering what kind of ads they had in South Korea. After all you’re responding to a thread on particular adverts, and you’ve sat down to watch 4 hours of Adam Curtis’s documentary expressing the power of advertising over millions of people in the 20th Century. Good isn’t it?

    Reply
    • John, I never said I ignored ads, as that’s an impossibility. I said I pay them no attention. I actually only read this article & its associated comments out of a curiosity to see if it would spark a censorship debate instead of the usual one on exploitation, etc. And yes, it is very good.

      Reply
  • Come on now folks. All these debates & rows over the content of commercials just make me laugh. Personally, I pay no attention whatsoever to ads of any kind as I believe it’s advertising itself that’s the problem – marketing companies being paid fortunes to shovel this crap down our throats, using false information & propaganda in an attempt to manipulate us into spending money we don’t have on crap we don’t need! The reactions provoked by these “offensive” ads is merely playing into the advertisers’ hands & doing 90% of their work for them. If you’d all just learn to ignore commercials & reject commercialism, I for one believe the world would be at least a step closer to being a better place.

    And it’s not just me… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmUzwRCyTSo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Reply
  • Down with this sort of thing…

    Reply
  • Nydon 11/09/12 #

    A woman being used as sex object to draw attention to an advertising message (sex doesn’t always sell but it nearly always draws attention) is seen by women as demeaning to women in general and possibly men also.
    A man being used in the same way is generally seen by men (if considered at all) in terms of “that guy is demeaning himself but nothing to do with me” – unless I want to use it as a counter argument in a debate.
    What’s kinda hard to understand is why the actual female models are exonerated from complicity by other women. – even if its obvious that other work is available to them.

    Reply
    • They were all kidnapped at midnight and blindfolded and flown to Colombia to make this ad against their will. They also lived down a mine for the duration of the shoot and were paid a tenner. Misfortunes. Evil marketing company, exploiting people like that.

      Reply
  • It’s anything but “lazy” advertising , they are not to my liking but are they getting people talking m on forums , in pubs , on the radio shows , there are thousands of messages a day trying to attention for brands , to get “cut thru” and have people even discussing club orange is working , it’s just advertise folks , and in the really competitive area of selling soft drinks , there’s really no such thing as bad publicity.

    Reply
  • think this ad is gas..everyone has a different sense of humor and i mean women can complain about this funny ad dats really nt that offensive…but yet go out in there droves to buy 50 shades of grey??and have no problems with it being displayed on shop shelves where kids can see it…bit of double standards no?

    Reply
  • “Quirky and unconventional humour” Actually C&C, I think you’ll find sexist innuendo about “bits” is probably one of the most boring, unfunny, bog standard types of joke imaginable, having been made by immature schoolboys since the dawn of time.
    The laziness of the whole thing annoys me more than the degrading objectification.

    Reply
    • Couldn’t agree more.

      Reply
    • fair enough, so don’t buy their brand. We’re talking censorship here though.

      Reply
    • I agree 100%. I find the ads immature, lazy and boring. I mean, really, is this the best you can do, C&C? Surely being unfunny is a worse crime than being offensive.

      Reply
    • Just to fill you, and Sara Bennett (below), in, C&C aren’t the folks behind the Club Orange adverts: it’s actually Britvic. The Advertising Standards Authority of Ireland (ASAI), in their infinite wisdom, have already issued to an apology for linking them (the previous owners) to the outcome of the report.

      “The ASAI said that they regretted the fact that the detail in the particular report identified the previous owners of the brand C&C Group plc as the advertisers rather than Britvic plc the current owners. This correction has been issued to all media sources that received the original release.” (Source: http://asai.ie/news.asp?nid=81)

      Let’s just clear that up before we/*some* start giving out about C&C.

      Back on the topic however, I think overall there are far bigger things to be worrying about than advertisements. These adverts are from earlier in the year- and there have been *far* more controversial ones since then. In fear of starting a war, I won’t name one in particular- but if you’ve been following the news online recently, you’ll know that it is.

      Let’s just move on, for goodness sake! SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

      Reply
    • You’d want to have a sense of humour you dope

      Reply
    • It’s amazing how women always complain about these adverts, but the diet coke adverts with the men stripping off were perfectly fine, usual feminist double standards

      Reply
  • who has this ad actually hurt??? whos life is this ad going to greatly affect??? will anyone hear/say the sentence “my life would be so much better if i hadn’t seen all those boobs on that ad that time..”. haven’t we all got more pressing issues to be getting on with?

    Reply
    • @ali collier

      are you aware of the harassment and rape that women are subjected too because men think they are just a piece of meat?

      These ads feed into that mentality, and though it pains me I have to keep my mouth shut when my niece steps out in a dress so short you can see you know what, and the boobs are hanging out, the 6 inch heels that she can’t even walk in. She looks like a stripper to be honest, but this is now the fashion for girls in this day and age.

      However whenever Ive asked a man does he want his daughter working as a lap dancer or pole dancer or stripper the answer is always no! Yet the ads of women being highly sexualised it is ok because that is someone elses daughter.

      Reply
    • @Mary o’brien do u think if all women wore overalls that rape and harassment would cease to exist??

      Reply
    • ok Ali im going to leave it there with you. You refuse to even entertain what I a saying regarding the link between the sexualisation of women in society, and the belief of certain men that they can just use a womans body for their own ends.

      you have your opinion, I have mine, I am not going to waste my time going down the road of what about this, what about that.

      All I will say is would the ad merit any attention at all if the woman was wearing a pair of overalls? Would we be talking about it. No.

      Reply
    • @Mary – You summed it up 100% Percent. We would not be talking about the ad had the women worn overalls, so therefore the ad has been 100% successful, all the hype its getting job done.

      Reply
  • how about a pair of testicles bulging out of the sides of a pair of jocks. It would make a change form womens bodies being used to sell crap.

    Reply
  • Best.
    Ad.
    Ever.

    Reply
  • you’ve played right into there hands. how many of us here are talking about club orange who wouldn’t have talked about it today. hasn’t anyone learned anything from the simpsons ignore the advertising and it will go away. @mary o brien i’m horrified that you think as a man i could be willing to rape or sexually harrass a women because of some sexual innuendo in an advertising campaign.

    Reply
    • I don’t think that JJ. I said the routines use of rape and harassment against women is predicated upon the notion that womens bodies are publicly available for mens use. And these ads encourage this belief. This is not about you.

      As you know most men are not rapists, but the existing evidence shows the conviction for rape is still very low and shows that sexual assaults of women are not taken seriously by the State or society. Thus it is my contention that these ads add to the continuing notion that womens bodies do not belong to them.

      Of course the women selling their bodies contribute to that belief as well. But as someone up stream commented they are being well paid for it, because in the capitalist system a womans body is just another commodity to be bought and sold.

      Reply
  • I have to admit, I fell around the place laughing when I first saw this ad. I couldn’t believe they would have the cheek to do it… and get away with it. For what it’s worth, I think it is a top class piece of work – excellent innuendo (if a little obvious), not exploitative (well…maybe exploits men just a “bit”….please, exploit me exploit me!)

    So, if a handful of people find this insulting in some way, the book gets thrown. Voice of the minority ruling…I thought we were more democratic?!

    Reply
  • That in a nut shell is why I hate this country. Still back in the 70′s

    Reply
  • The ads aimed to use and exploit women’s bodies to sell a product that had nothing to do with them. It was tasteless and embarrassing. So yeah, bad ad.

    Reply
  • Whingeing feminist windbags

    Reply
  • Where are all the complaints about advertisements that feature muscly men in oil with their shirts off? Ohhh right yeah nobody bothers complaining when it’s a bloke.

    There really are some old biddy’s in this country and need to get over the fact that we’re not a sheltered Christian community anymore. If these ads shock you then simply ignore them. Do I find it a bit demeaning that a company would try and use sex to sell a product? No not really because the majority of the time it works.

    Nobody is being exploited either as others claim here as these models get well paid for what they do and willingly enter in to such a job as to male models.

    I think that with all the shite this country is going through at the moment you’d think that seeing someone’s cleavage on a bus shelter with a little bit of subtle innuendo wouldn’t be people’s primary concern.

    Priorities people.

    Reply
  • tangible link between a pair of women’s breasts and the brand Club Orange”. mmmmm.

    Reply
  • Get your bits out, get your bits out, get your bits out for the lads! :D

    Reply
  • interesting reaction from the mainly men commenting on here. Why are you all so sensitive? These ads are just as demeaning to men as they are to women. They suggest that men are so bovine they will go out and buy a can of crap orange just because they got a flash of boobage.

    The men I know are better than that. And they are certainly more open minded to my opinion than to just keep saying it s a laugh, more important things in life etc etc.

    Free your minds, and the rest will follow…………..

    Reply
    • You seem the one who’s sensitive and approve of censorship of an ad because it refers to breasts.

      To reply in your style… why are you uncomfortable with the thought of breasts? Are you self conscious about yours, or weirdly attracted to them?

      Reply
    • stop projecting onto me. I never said anything about censorship. That just shows the weakness of your position that you have to put words into my mouth. If you read my other posts I am trying to place the ad in the context of the wider sexualisation of womens bodies in society.

      For the record I do not support censorship, not that I suppose that matters to you, or that you will take it back?

      Your second paragraph is just pathetic, sorry.

      Reply
    • Jingles 11/09/12 #

      Well you certainly seem to advocate the censorship of ads with visual sexuality as a theme. I find the female form beautiful and can understand why others find men that way. This sells products, look at most perfume/aftershave adverts.
      For the record I think the ad in question is deliberately ridiculous as are the people who waste time complaining about it.

      Reply
    • seeming to advocate something in your eyes, and actually advocating it are two different things.

      The seeming to advocate exists in your head, and the not actually adovcating it exists in mine.

      Ok?

      Reply
  • Annie 11/09/12 #

    Best ad is done deal. Where the woman trying to sell her husband! It’s hilarious & you would actually feel sorry for him! (-:

    Reply
  • Sex sells, since the first caveman discovered he could draw porn on a cave wall and charge admission this was known. When a product is being brought to the advertising people they decide who it’s going to be marketed to, men, women or both. Say you have an expensive new sports car, the target market is millionaire playboys with deep pockets, so the marketing people show the car draped with models in bikinis. It works.
    When Coke wanted to market Diet Coke they decided their target market would be predominantly women and so the marketing people show “sex in the city-ish” type adds with women drooling over muscular men. But when they marketed Coke Zero they decided their market would be men this time and the adds were completely different, showing the man getting the girl and having a “James Bond-ish” time getting away with it. Sex sells.

    Diet Coke add – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpizkWEmg1g

    Coke Zero add –
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7LMZJ_Fb1g

    Reply
  • dee 11/09/12 #

    I see the mature members of the country have wound up on this post….
    The point that Mary is repeatedly making above is the historic and continuous portrayal of women as objects which is another factor of the still-poor standing that they continue to have in the following ways:

    A gender paygap that the Irish Government is doing nothing to fight – http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/DegreesofEquality.pdf/Files/DegreesofEquality.pdf

    the everyday on-the-street, in work, daily life abuse that women put up with – http://www.everydaysexism.com/

    The demoralising rape and sexual assault reporting, convictions and sentencing- http://humanrightsinireland.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/rape-and-justice-in-ireland/

    When you take this advertisement in context with the wider world, it is pretty obvious that the continuous objectification and belittling of women carries on holding us all back – both men and women. particularly with adverts such as this.

    Also its lazy, rubbish advertising. Are we not a nation of highly educated people anymore?

    Reply
  • Mmmmm….

    Reply
  • As a heterosexual man I found those Club Orange ads, and the Hunky Dory ones insulting. The idea I am going to buy their product because they use some really crap inuendo and some scantily clad women is an insult to my intelligence and that of anyone attracted to men. Its just incredibly lazy as well. The idea that sex sells crisps and fizzy orange is hilariously stupid.

    Reply
  • Came here for some camel toe, wassup?

    Reply
  • Dear journal.ie, why do some contributers have a reply option and not others. Also why are comments not sequenced in some order so I don’t have to scroll up and down to find who is replying to whom. And another thing I’ve never squesed either product in that club orange ad, does that mean I’m deprived/depraved. Thanks for tollerating me.

    Reply
    • Ciaran – Taking your questions in order:

      1) There’s a Reply option directly underneath each ‘primary’ comment; the idea is that you can leave a comment in response to this (i.e. to leave a ‘secondary’ comment) but allowing direct replies to secondary comments (i.e. ‘tertiary’ comments) would only end up giving you a messy page. If you wish to leave a reply to a secondary comment, you can hit ‘reply’ to the primary one above it.

      2) I can’t tell you why people do what they do, but I suspect it’s because they don’t understand (1) above.

      3) Club Orange is a surprisingly accessible product, and the bits are graaaand.

      Reply
  • Why did the feminist cross the road? Why shouldn’t she??

    Reply

Add New Comment