Cathy Valencia gets SPANK'd!

Jewelz SPANKs...

I saw another ad that violated the Philippine Advertising Code of Ethics along EDSA, Cubao by Cathy Valencia. It had a picture of a woman who looks naked covering her chest with h

er arm and they covered the bottom with a swipe of the color blue to match the background. The billboard was advertising a skin and body center where you can improve your skin. The message of the billboard is: "You can have flawless skin at Cathy Valencia Skin Center," and the photo is relevant to the service, however, I believe that it is indecent to show a naked woman on the billboard. In Article IV, Section 1, # 5 of the Philippine Advertising Code of Ethics, it says,

“Indecent exposure of the human body may be allowed in advertisements when in good taste ad relevant to the product or service being advertised, the situation being portrayed or the audience being addressed.”

The Cathy Valencia billboard violated Article 4, Section 1, number 5 by exposing to much skin! It serves as a distraction and furthermore, it degrades the woman in the billboard ad because she was exposing herself in public. What is private should be kept private and should not be seen by anyone and everyone.

This is NOT the billboard I saw along EDSA in Cubao, but here is a picture of Cathy Valencia's other billboards that do not show a naked woman and would have been better to use in all locations.

Have you seen the Cathy Valencia ad along EDSA, Cubao? What do you have to say seeing a naked woman on a billboard?

Bench gets SPANK'd again!

Jewelz posts:

Bench Body Billboard

Thanks to one of our readers who spotted this ad by Guadalupe. This is definitely getting SPANK'd! The model/actor is the well known Sergio from Marimar. I can't believe Dingdong allowed to pose like that. What's worse is there's another enormous billboard by Balintawak, near the exit of NLEX. In that billboard, Dingdong is posing in a way where he is doing push ups and is wearing nothing but his underwear. I think it is a major distraction for drivers because it makes you want to look at it and see everything.

Let me know the reasons why this ad is SPANK'd... Cite what part of the Advertising Code of Ethics this billboard violates which was also mentioned in earlier posts?

Max by Revicon gets SPANK'd

Jewelz believes...

Although Max by Revicon no longer shows this ad on television, I still think that they should get SPANK'd for showing it on local TV. There are many children watching local TV shows and they too are exposed to its sexual connotations. When children see this behavior, they may think that it is okay and it is being accepted, when in reality it is NOT.

At first we think the ad is for extra energy and exercise, however, in the end the girl sits up and we realize that this is for married men because of its sexual content.

This ad should be targeted to married men and should not be broadcasted on television. They should use other forms of advertising such as direct marketing to avoid those outside their target market from viewing it.

This TV commercial violated the Advertising Code of Ethics - Article IV, Sec. 1, # 6, which states,
“Advertisements should not depict or exploit persons as sex objects and should not carry any sexual entendres.” According to Oxford English Dictionary, sexual entendres means having a double sense or meaning. This TV commercial suggests that the man and woman were doing the sexual act. This ad is SPANK'd!

What's your say?

Max by Revicon

Jewelz shares...

Check out this ad: Max by Revicon

It used to be shown on TV in local channels.

Do you like this ad?

Frenzy Condoms - FX Wraps gets SPANK'd

Jewelz replies...

A few of our readers noticed that there are FX wraps of Frenzy Condoms roaming Metro Manila. Frenzy is definitely getting SPANK'd!

Frenzy used to be advertised on television with the tagline, "Get into it," which was a message targeted to teens. They portrayed it in an attractive and cool manner to be able to get the attention of teens. Furthermore, Frenzy used FX Wraps for their below the line advertising which reinforced the idea of pre-marital sex targeted to teenagers.

This is definitely a sin product because for one, condoms are mainly used as a contraception so that those engaging in sexual intercourse would prevent the girl from becoming pregnant. Second, this should not be even marketed because it goes against procreation. Third, it allows two people who are not married to behave indecently without having to deal with the consequences.

If one wants to argue that condoms are used to prevent sexually transmitted diseases, maybe one should think about finding the right person and getting married first.

Having Frenzy use FX wraps to market to teenagers is not a good idea because it degrades our society which upholds strict values such as human dignity, respect and togetherness of the family. It also promotes sexual promiscuity among the youth.

Frenzy condoms shouldn't be marketed at all, especially to teenagers. These ads violated the Advertising Code of Ethics, Article 1, Section 8, which says,
“Advertising has a social, economic, and cultural responsibility to the community and the advertiser’s interest should take into account community interest.”

Thank you to Jox, 61 and to those who suggested that Frenzy condoms should be SPANK'd. We strongly agree with you.

What else do you have to say about Frenzy condoms?

Bingo Biscuits...

Erine says...

Hmm... I don't know whether the mall meeting was intended to bring some humor into this ad or just mainly an attention grabber targeted for teens. What I do know though is that the ad's abruption (surprise factor) is rather insulting on the part of the women since the guy who brought Bingo cookies got turned off when he saw a fat girl in pink and thought she was the one he was supposed to meet. What the execution basically shows is the fact that there are certain - shall we say - imperfections in society (e.g. homosexuality, plain simple ugliness and obesity) that we find unappealing and that we would rather avoid them, but then again, why show them? If a fat person (forgive me for the term) would watch that TV commercial... just try to guess what his (or in this case, her) reaction would be?

Sure the execution is not sexually implicit, I'll say that much for it, but then again what does showing a mall meeting have to do with the crunchiness of Bingo cookie sandwiches? These are snack foods that are being advertised, so if the client company or agency believes that crunchiness of Bingo cookie sandwiches is the unique selling proposition for this product, then show it in a straightforward manner!

One last thing before I finish this entry: If you want a great example of a snack food advertisement, then look for the old Chippy TV ads. If some of you remember that one where a barkada watches a horror flick then suddenly a white lady appears and steals their last bag of Chippy, you'll know what I mean. At the end of that commercial, the guys decide to go after her - completely disregarding the fact that they are up against a ghostly figure, since its THEIR chips that she stole! Now, that's a great commercial! ^_^

Here's something useful that our group found in the Philippine Advertising Code of Ethics, Check it out:

Advertising Code of Ethics – Art. IV, Sec. 2, # 2

“Neither should advertisements directly or indirectly disparage, ridicule, criticize or attack any natural person or groups of persons especially on the bias of gender , social or economic class, religion, race or nationality.”

In layman's terms: Don't put any messages that can insult certain types of people (in this case, overweight people)

Bottomline: Spank this ad! Not becuase its sexually implicit but because the execution simply has nothing to do with the brand's unique selling proposition! (The ad is unethical because it carries an insulting message).

Bingo Biscuits - Eyeball

Bingo Biscuits by Monde...

Do you like this ad?

What ads should be SPANK'd?

Let us hear what you have to say?
What ads do you think should be SPANK'd?

Good ads...

Jewelz shares...

In our Marketing Communications Research class, we had an assignment where we would choose good ads and bad ads. We also had to find out what makes an ad good and what makes them bad. Our group (Chin Taguines, Ikai Lopez and Avvy Hernandez) came up with a criteria from what we learned from other classes.

Here is out criteria:

1. Never Been Done. This means the idea in the ad is fresh. It is unique and has never been done.
2. Single-minded. The ad is focused and is understood by the target audience.
3. Appealing Execution. The ad is pleasant, and the audience wants to look at it. It is also artful and likeable. The ad can also be entertaining and it is hard to ignore.
4. Unassailable. The ad can not be questioned. The product or service must be able to deliver and this gives the brand credibility.
5. Strategic. The ad should be relevant and it should answer the problem; a solution to a need or want.
6. Moving. It should be able to move the mind or heart. It evokes action.
7. Ethical. Should not promote bad behavior or ideals.

Keeping this in mind, we think good ads should be able to comply with the criteria. One good example is the Emperador Brandy, Tagumpay ad. Emperador is an alcoholic drink, yet it did not show girls in skimpy outfits and they weren't objectifying women to sell their product. Instead, they showed the Gutierrez brothers celebrating their achievements in relation to what their dads had taught them. Let us applaud Emperador Brandy.

Here is another ad that did very well too! It's one of my favorites, the Dove Self Esteem Fund. I think it is a very good example of showing children and teens the true meaning of beauty. Being beautiful does not mean you are the richest, prettiest or skinniest girl like the one shown in billboards and advertisements, but each and every one of us is beautiful inside and out because we are unique. Claps again for another wonderful ad.

What do you think of the ads? Tell me your reactions, I'd like to hear from you. :)

Enfakid got SPANK'd!

This is one of those ads people see in media, whether print, radio or TV, that does not come across as unethical. We see advertisements like these a lot. Examples of milk brands that show ads like this are Gain and Promil. Yes, this advertisement does not have any offensive visuals and messages just as the other unethical ads we have posted in this blog. Nevertheless, are ads that degrade human dignity the only ads deserved to be considered “unethical”? Of course not.

This ad clearly conveys that a child’s development is possible through proper nutrition. Without question there is nothing wrong with that. What makes this advertisement wrong is that it may convince the viewer into thinking that milk (particularly their brand, Enfakid) is what a child needs to become successful in the future. Although this is implicitly conveyed in the ad, the ad does not seem to consider that a person’s success is not only a result of the nutrition a person gets during his formative years. A person’s success is also a result of other factors such as genes, “natural God-given” talent, practice, hard work, etc. Hence, this advertisement violated Article IV, Section 1, Number 3 of the Advertising Code of Ethics. This says, “An advertisement should avoid any possible confusion as to the identity of the advertiser or the source or identity of a product or service.”

The advertisers were very smart in choosing the endorser (Lea Salonga) for this ad to make this ad’s message clear and more believable. Lea Salonga is not only a well-known singer here in the Philippines but also abroad. She has been in several successful local and international musicals and concerts. Despite this, it was wrong of them to choose Lea Salonga as the endorser because Enfakid is a newly introduced milk product of Mead Johnson and the advertisement “claims” that Lea Salonga used the product during her early years. Knowing this and knowing that Lea is already 37 years old makes you doubt the truthfulness of their claim that her “use” of the milk helped her become successful. How could have Lea drank Enfakid when she was young when Enfakid was just released not more than 5 years ago? Not to mention, the young kid in the advertisement is not Lea Salonga but a kid called Jermaine. Moreover, didn’t Lea endorse Klim, a milk brand by Nestle, when she was young? This all shows that there is almost nothing true in the commercial. Therefore, this advertisement has also violated Article 1, Section 4 of the Advertising Code of ethics which says,

“Advertising must provide the general public with relevant and truthful information on products and services, thereby helping consumers make their respective choices”.

Milk advertisements should be like one of the ads aired last year by Nestle’s Nido. It was mentioned in the ad that genes and other factors help a child become intelligent and not only milk.

- Pearl

Bench Low rise jeans has been SPANK'd

Jewelz says...

When I first saw this ad awhile back, I had a similar reaction to most of the comments made in the previous post (Bench Ad - Low rise jeans). I thought it was funny, although I felt a bit ashamed because what if that ad came out and me and my mom were watching. Should I react to it and laugh out loud? Or should I pretend that I didn't get it?

It's obvious that Bench used sex to sell their product. In the first shot we see part of a naked body with a grandma and her grand daughter strolling. We then see the reaction of the grandma in seeing Sam Milby assuming that he was naked. As the camera zooms in showing the endorsers from top to bottom, the grandma grasps the wrist of her grand daughter tightly until the bead bracelet breaks and falls on the floor. Immediately, the sprinklers turn on and then shows that Sam Milby was wearing jeans after all. I definitely believe that there is no question about the sexual connotation that was in the ad. The timing, music, and visuals are syncronized to create a sensual effect. If it was you first time watching this ad, I'm pretty sure that you watched it from beginning to end and that was the whole point of this ad.

To some, having people watch an ad from beginning to end without changing the channel is an accomplishment. However, I believe that this ad should not have been broadcasted on TV especially because there are many viewers who are under aged and they may get the wrong ideas in dealing with the opposite sex. If it were only the adults watching this ad, I still think it would be wrong because when they watch the ad over and over again, they don't realize that they are becoming passive viewers. The first time they watch it, it may strike a funny bone. However, in the long run they won't realize that the ad is actually not good.

To cover up all the sexual connotations in the ad, Bench used Sam Milby, an actor and singer who was peaking in his career. Many people adored his character, buff body and of course his good looks!

According to the Philippine Advertising Code of Ethics in Article IV, Sec. 1, #5, it says,
“Indecent exposure of the human body may be allowed in advertisements when in good taste and relevant to the product or service being advertised, the situation being portrayed or the audience being addressed.”

The ad shows Sam Milby half naked but makes the viewers think that he’s really naked. I believe that this advertisement violated Article 4, Section 1 of the advertising Code of Ethics.

Furthermore, in Article IV, Section 1, #6 it says, “Advertisements should not depict or exploit persons as sex objects and should not carry any sexual entendres.” The Oxford English Dictionary defines sexual entendres as having a double sense or meaning. Don't you think that the Bench Ad of Sam Milby contains double meaning? Look at the timing, music and visuals. All together they have sexual connotations which are inappropriate to show on television. What would the viewers think?

I am not trying to put down Bench or Sam Milby for that matter. I would just like to bring to attention the sexual implicit message found in the ad, which should not have been shown. I think Bench could improve the Low-rise jeans ad and execute it in a more creative way.

Please check out: Bench Low Rise Jeans to view the ad and the comments.

Tell me what you think? What's your stand?

First Commercial: BENCH

Bench Low Rise Jeans Television Commercial

Please take a moment and watch this short video

Now that you've seen it, WHAT DO YOU THINK of this ad?
Do you like/not like it? Why?

We would greatly appreciate your comments.

Do you like this ad?