Abortion Services Advertisement Cleared by the ASA
The first television commercial for post conception advice by Maris Stopes led to the Advertising Standards Authority receiving almost 5,000 complaints, fueled by attacks from anti-abortion groups. Apparently the ASA also received a petition against the advertisement from the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children.
Despite the fierce objections however the ASA did not uphold the complaints, indeed it may well be argued that no other outcome was feasible since the advertisement did not breach any of the Code rules, as we stated in our blog of 24 May 2010 . The ASA concluded that the advertisement would not cause widespread offence and was not harmful in that it would not encourage promiscuity or overly appeal to young people.
It is interesting nevertheless to consider the grounds that were used by complainants to object to the advertisement. Arguments against the commercials were wide ranging and included: that the commercial was a political message; the ad promoted abortion; offended the religious beliefs of some viewers; trivialised the decision to choose abortion; did not take into account the views of the father; was sexist in that it portrayed pregnancy as a woman's responsibility; and that it would encourage promiscuity among young people and that it equated decisions about the life of an unborn child with decisions about consumer goods.
None of these views were accepted and the ASA adjudication states:
We considered that it was clear that the ad was promoting the Advice Line as a source of information for ..women, and noted that it did not advocate one option over another.
Unsurprisingly anti-abortion groups are upset at the decision, with the ProLife Alliance claiming the ASA has ignored clear breaches of the Code. The commercials were though carefully and sensitively produced and there is little doubt the advertisements are compliant with the BCAP Code. As I commented in May this year in Campaign Magazine, given this is a highly sensitive area, there will always be those who object to the right to advertise such services.
