Case Report
1
2
3
4
5
6
Case Number
Advertiser
Product
Type of Advertisement / media
Date of Determination
DETERMINATION
0374/16
Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Ltd
Toiletries
TV - Pay
14/09/2016
Dismissed
ISSUES RAISED
2.1 - Discrimination or Vilification Race
2.6 - Health and Safety Within prevailing Community Standards
DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT
The advertisement features a woman washing her hair in a pool in the jungle. A group of
tribesmen are featured nearby and one tribesman provides the narration, speaking of the
virtues of the product.
THE COMPLAINT
A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included
the following:
First off encouraging or even putting a woman in a highly protected area of the rain forest
washing her hair with products as such is wrong because it may encourage people to think
that it is ok to use such products in pristine environment, tainting it with chemicals. They are
giving the impression that it is safe. SECONDLY and most importantly I argue, was the
approval they show by a man impersonating a native tribe from such a pristine rainforest
area, is not only racist but wrong on so many levels. It is typical of anglo culture
appropriating and misrepresenting cultures in order to sell products. It is very offensive to
the people that they are impersonating and even if there are not such native tribes it is wrong
to mislead people to think that a native tribe at a non-tainted pristine environmental niche as
depicted would EVER encourage a white woman to have a bath in their waters tainting it
with all sorts of chemicals for her hair. This is misleading on so many levels and racist and it
is wrong. IT needs to go.
THE ADVERTISER’S RESPONSE
Comments which the advertiser made in response to the complainant/s regarding this
advertisement include the following:
We refer to your letter of 24 August 2016 in relation to a complaint received by the Bureau
about our Herbal Essences “Take your Hair to Paradise” advertisement which featured on
Foxtel, the pay television service (Advertisement). Thank you for the opportunity to respond
to the complaint. As you know, our company is committed to ethical practice in its
advertising and appreciates all consumer feedback.
In relation to the Advertisement, while P&G acknowledges the complainant’s concerns
regarding their interpretation of cultural insensitivity and environmental irresponsibility on
our part, we believe that the Advertisement is fully compliant with the Code.
While our company respects the complainant’s point of view, when the Advertisement is
judged against prevailing community standards, it can be seen that the Advertisement is not a
racist, offensive, stereotypical exploitation of a particular indigenous group nor does it
encourage the contamination of the pristine environment of a rainforest. Rather, it is a lighthearted evocation of an alluring jungle paradise which, by its association with Herbal
Essences, allows consumers to enjoy the delightful sensation of a fantasy escape.
With that brief introduction, we confirm that a CAD reference number and rating is not
required to be sought for an advertisement on Foxtel, which is a pay television service. The
Advertisement has also appeared on YouTube since July 2015 and can be viewed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwxTftl0qkU.
As the Bureau and Advertising Standards Board (Board) will be able to see when the
Advertisement is viewed, it features a beautiful young woman washing her hair in a mythical
jungle setting, with narration provided by a tribesman.
A number of features of the Advertisement are exaggerated and mere advertising ‘puffery’:
• the formality and accent of the delivery of the voiceover by the tribesman and his serious
demeanour is incongruous against the primal beauty of the woman and the scene;
• while the woman is beautiful and the hair washing luxurious, at one point, her shampooed
hair covers her face, an experience we may identify with and so, briefly, the sensuous languor
of the scene is humorously punctuated;
• the tribe is stiff and formal, in contrast with the exuberance of the jungle and the scene;
• the beautiful woman is, in the final scene, again momentarily a target of fun when a large
fluttering butterfly lands on her face and unsettles her otherwise composed serenity; and
• the language used in the voiceover for example, in phrases such as “the essence of
follicular vitality” is pompous, in a self-deprecating dig at the advertiser itself and the
industry in which it participates.
In this way, the advertiser solely intends a light hearted, over-the-top portrayal of the
amazing multi-sensorial experience of using Herbal Essences products.
Considering then, relevant aspects of section 2 of the Code in light of prevailing community
standards, it can be seen that the Advertisement is compliant with the Code:
• Section 2.1 - as noted, P&G does not believe that the Advertisement identifies a particular
racial or ethnic group because the tribe is of an unidentified fantasy jungle. Even if one could
take from the Advertisement that a particular native racial group is identified, there is
nothing that could amount to the ‘misrepresentation of culture’, if that term is intended to
refer to discrimination of a native race (unfair or less favourable treatment) or vilification
(humiliate, intimidate, insight hatred, contempt or ridicule), given the light hearted nature of
the Advertisement. There is no negative impression created by the imagery and language
used in the Advertisement.
• Sections 2.2 and 2.4 - while a key feature of the scene of the Advertisement is a beautiful
woman, by implication naked, engaged in an act of personal bathing, the Advertisement
exercises restraint in dealing with such aspects. There is no overt nudity and, while the
shampooing of the hair is portrayed as a luxurious and delightful experience, sexualisation is
avoided. The “tribe” is gender diverse and there is no suggestion of anything unpleasant or
demeaning to the individual woman depicted, the tribeswomen depicted or other woman
generally.
• Section 2.3 - no issue appears to arise in relation to 2.3.
• Section 2.5 - no issue appears to arise in relation to 2.5.
• Section 2.6 – P&G does not believe that the the Advertisement depicts or endorses a method
of bathing which exposes the featured woman to any risk of infection or health complications
as a result of poor sanitation or hygiene. It is clear to a reasonable consumer that the setting
and method of bathing outdoors in a forest is fantastical and not representative of a real life
scenario.
Further, if section 2.6 could be interpreted broadly such as to encompass environmental
safety, P&G does not believe the Advertisement depicts or endorses a means of engaging
with the natural environment which is contrary to prevailing community standards on health
and safety. The Advertisement is intended to be a light-hearted, over-the-top portrayal of the
amazing, multi-sensorial experience that happens when you use Herbal Essences products.
P&G uses the setting of a beautiful jungle paradise to suggest that we use vibrant naturebased scents and that using our products make consumers feel amazing. P&G is committed to
responsible growth and to reducing the environmental impact of our products. The Bureau
can read more about P&G’s commitments to sustainability by visiting:
http://www.pg.com/en_US/sustainability/environmental_sustainability/index.shtml
Finally, considering the Advertisement overall in light of other advertising material widely
seen by the public, the Advertisement can be seen as entirely acceptable by reference to
prevailing community standards. It is intended to represent the fantastical, sensoral and
luxurious experience a consumer may feel in using the Herbal Essences product, featuring a
young woman who is treated with respect. While respecting differences of opinion, P&G
believe that most of the community would see the Advertisement as more than acceptable.
We sincerely trust that these comments assist the Bureau and the Board in considering the
complaint.
THE DETERMINATION
The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches
Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”).
The Board noted the complainant’s concerns that the advertisement features a stereotypical
depiction of South American indigenous people which is racist and not appropriate and that
showing a woman washing her hair in a rainforest is damaging to the environment.
The Board viewed the advertisement and noted the advertiser’s response.
The Board considered whether the advertisement complied with Section 2.1 of the Code
which requires that 'advertisements shall not portray or depict material in a way which
discriminates against or vilifies a person or section of the community on account of race,
ethnicity, nationality, gender, age, sexual preference, religion, disability, mental illness or
political belief.'
The Board noted this television advertisement features a woman washing her hair in a
rainforest environment described by the voiceover as a ‘mystical jungle’ and that when the
camera pans back we see the voice belongs to a tribesman covered in body paint and
surrounded by other tribesmen and women.
The Board noted it had previously dismissed complaints about the same advertisement when
it was aired on the internet in case 0472/15 where:
“The Board noted that by describing the rainforest as a mystical jungle the origin of the
indigenous race depicted is not made explicitly clear. The Board acknowledged that the
tribesmen and women could be interpreted as being South American but considered that even
if they were, the way in which they are depicted is not negative or demeaning. The Board
noted that the manner in which the main tribesman describes the shampoo product is intended
to be humorous and considered that the viewer is being invited to laugh with him, at the
overall concept of the advertisement, rather than at him. The Board noted that this humorous
undertone is further enforced by the model’s reaction to the butterfly landing on her face in
the closing scene and considered that overall the advertisement depicts an idyllic rainforest
setting in a humorous manner and does not depict indigenous people of any particular area in
a way which discriminates against or vilifies a person or group of people on account of their
race.”
Consistent with its previous determination the Board considered that the current
advertisement does not depict indigenous people of any particular area in a way which
discriminates against or vilifies a person or group of people on account of their race.
The Board determined that the advertisement did not breach Section 2.1 of the Code.
The Board considered Section 2.6 of the Code. Section 2.6 of the Code states: “Advertising
or Marketing Communications shall not depict material contrary to Prevailing Community
Standards on health and safety”.
The Board noted the complainant’s concerns that showing a woman washing her hair in a
rainforest is damaging to the environment.
The Board noted the advertiser’s response that the advertisement is fantastical and not
intended to be representative of a real life scenario.
The Board noted that the Forests (Recreation) Regulations, 2010
(www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/web_notes/.../10-30sr001.doc) provide that:
“A person must not use or dispose of any soap, detergent or similar substance in a forest
reserve or forest park within 50 metres of any alpine bog, dam, bore or waterway”.
The Board acknowledged that global environmental issues are of current community concern,
and that Regulations in Australia would forbid the behaviour in the advertisement, but the
Board considered that the advertisement is clearly presenting an unrealistic situation which is
unlikely to encourage copycat behaviour.
The Board determined that the advertisement did not breach Section 2.6 of the Code.
Finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on other grounds, the Board
dismissed the complaint.