David Beckham pants ad received complaints

The advertising campaign used for David Beckham’s range of bodywear for fashion retailer H&M has received five complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) regarding its digital poster which displayed three images of the

famous footballer, one of which showed him wearing only a pair of trunk briefs.

The complainants claimed that the advert was offensive and that H&M had been irresponsible because the image was unsuitable for children to see, but the ASA ruled that this was not true and the images were “not socially irresponsible”.

The government adjudicator also added that the image was deemed inoffensive and suitable for children, and it stated in its summary that: “There was no explicit nudity in the image, and that the ad was for an underwear range. We considered that the nature of the product meant viewers of the ad were less likely to regard the ad as gratuitous or offensive, and considered that the poses and facial expressions of David Beckham were mildly sexual at most.

“While we acknowledged that some viewers might consider the images distasteful, we concluded the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.”

In response to the complaints, H&M said: “The campaign focused on quality, fit, function, comfort and design, and said the campaign aimed to show the function and fit of the garment.” Adding that all the outdoor sited used for the campaign were picked because they would reach its target audience of 18-39 year-olds, and were set away from schools, except one poster that fell within 100m of a school.

One retailer not so lucky in the weekly ASA adjudications was American Apparel who has been rapped for a series of ads that inappropriately sexualise young women. The ads, which appeared on the retailer’s own website and in a magazine, received complaints for being “offensive” for showing women in underwear and included bare buttocks and breasts.

American Apparel claims that the images on their website featured “real, non-airbrushed, everyday people” and were not portrayed as “vulnerable, negative or exploitative”. However, the complaint was upheld against eight out of nine ads investigated, which the ASA believes included “gratuitous nudity” and must not be shown again. The ASA has also advised American Apparel not to use similar images in future.