Advice charities cutting back face-to-face services
19 Jun 2013
Leading advice services are being forced to cut back on face-to-face support and place more emphasis on...
Sorry for interrupting, but there is something we need to tell you...
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.
If you wish to restrict or block web browser cookies which are set on your device then you can do this through your browser settings, the Help function within your browser will tell you how.
Many people feel charity advertisements go too far in portraying distressing images and situations, or in making them feel guilty for not donating, according to a report for the Advertising Standards Authority.
The ASA said it was surprised to discover in research it commissioned that there is a level of public concern about hard-hitting charity advertising and public service adverts. The findings are revealed in its harm and offence report which gauges public opinion which the regulator uses as a guide for its decision-making on adverts.
The report read: “Many participants felt that some charity adverts contained offensive content that went too far in seeking to make people feel uncomfortable or guilty, or used imagery that was considered too distressing despite being for a worthwhile cause.”
Some adults believed that charity advertising had purposefully targeted children in order to harness their ‘pester power’ to get parents to donate. Children themselves reported feeling distressed by charity advertising, but also upset due to their inability to help.
These findings jar with a YouGov report from 2010 which found that four out of five people believed shock tactics are justified in charity advertising.
International aid organisations, animal welfare charities and child protection organisations were singled out as being “frequently cited” by survey participants asked to remember adverts they found offensive.
However, the ASA said that the issue of charity advertising polarised the public. Opinions were far more emphatic on issues of sexual and sexist advertising.
The ASA said that some people viewed gritty charity advertising as a “necessary evil”. “In this case participants could at least understand why charities benefit from seeking to encourage an emotional response through their adverts. Indeed, a significant minority supported charities using strong imagery to highlight they cause more effectively,” the report concluded.
Advertising on television, the internet and posters and billboards were perceived to be the biggest culprits of harmful or offensive content, according to the study. In the Fundraising Standards Board's annual report on fundraising complaints these three types of advertising scored very well in terms of numbers of complaints to volume, with television prompting just 440 complaints in 2011.
Colin Lloyd, chair of the FRSB, welcomed the report’s findings that many people supported charities’ need to get across the seriousness of their cause. He added: “It is clear there is a balance to be struck between charities’ needs to build causal awareness and public support with risk to their reputations from the negative impact of advertising that is felt to be distressing.”
Only 16 per cent of adult respondents to the ASA research, conducted by Ipsos Mori, said they had been offended by an advertisement in the previous year.
19 Jun 2013
Leading advice services are being forced to cut back on face-to-face support and place more emphasis on...
18 Jun 2013
The £500,000 allocated by the Cabinet Office to Big Society Network and Society Network Foundation since...
18 Jun 2013
The National Council for Voluntary Organisations has commissioned a report to find ways to encourage the...
19 Jun 2013
Disability charity the Papworth Trust and Workwise, a charity which supports people with mental health...
19 Jun 2013
The Housing and Support Alliance has teamed up with the co-founder of moneysupermarket.com and the Centre...
19 Jun 2013
Leading advice services are being forced to cut back on face-to-face support and place more emphasis on...
19 Jun 2013
The Housing and Support Alliance has teamed up with the co-founder of moneysupermarket.com and the Centre...
19 Jun 2013
Leading advice services are being forced to cut back on face-to-face support and place more emphasis on...
17 Jun 2013
The Charity Commission data sets on how charities spend their money will be made publicly available in...
Corporate Partnerships Survey 2012
from £35.00
BUY NOW
2012 Charity Shops Survey
from £75.00
BUY NOW
Fundraising (with optional website)
from £89.00
BUY NOW
29 Oct 2013
29 Oct 2013
29 Oct 2013
27 Nov 2013
Stephen Pidgeon
31 Jul 2012
Let's be clear, that casually mentioned figure of 16% of people who had been offended, had NOT been offended by charity ads., but by all ads. The main offenders were to do with sex, nudity, body image, gender stereotypes, violence and so on. The nearest thing we got to the level of offence in adults at charity ads was 'Some participants argued that these adverts can go too far, using distressing content to make people feel upset or guilty in a way that was considered inappropriate.' But in the same paragraph, it was then counterbalanced by the comment 'Others felt these adverts should have more scope to shock because of their worthwhile aims.'
And the general level of offence was judged to be 'in line with that found in similar research ten years ago'
So, I'm not sure, dear Editor, that a headline 'Charity adverts causing offence to 'many' ' is either appropriate or accurate.
[Reply]
Celina Ribeiro
Editor
Fundraising magazine
1 Aug 2012
Response to [Stephen Pidgeon]
Hi Stephen,
The use of the word 'many' (in quotation marks) is in reference to the ASA's own categorisation of the number of people who claimed to be offended by a charity advertisement. The ASA used the word with reference to charity ad offence repeatedly in its report, and thus it's used in reporting the ASA findings. The article attributes this 'many' to ASA, and does not conclude it itself.
As the report is used to form the basis of ASA's judgments in advertising complaints, it's important to understand the organisation's own impression of public sentiment.
[Reply]