Honey Birdette ‘non-compliant’ after another AANA Code of Ethics violation
Australian lingerie company Honey Birdette has been hit with yet another ruling in violation of the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) Code of Ethics and Advertising to Children’s Code for its window displays in shopping centres, and was again non-compliant with Ad Standards.
The Ad Standards Community Panel found the window advertising breached the Code’s Section 2.4 – sex, sexuality and nudity. It found the ads included “sexualised content which is inappropriate for advertising targeting children”.
Honey Birdette has breached Ad Standards again
The industry body has received numerous complaints about Honey Birdette promotions and advertisements for over a decade, and the latest complaint, and the brand’s 68th violation, featured two separate promotions deemed to have a “high level of nudity”.
The women depicted in the storefront windows were wearing red and black “strappy” lingerie and nipple pasties.
A complaint of a third ad of a woman wearing a robe was dismissed by Ad Standards as it was found to “treat sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant broad audience”.
The brand did not respond to any of the final determinations made by Ad Standards.
“The Panel determined the advertisement did not treat sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience and did breach Section 2.4 of the Code,” the Ad Standards case report said.
“Finding that the advertisement did breach Section 2.4 of the Code, the Panel upheld the complaints.
“The advertiser has not provided a response to the Panel’s decision. Ad Standards will continue to work with the relevant authorities regarding this issue of non-compliance.”
Keep up to date with Mumbrella Daily
Got a tip?
Lauren McNamara is a journalist at Mumbrella, covering the creative and PR beat. She joined in November 2022 as editorial assistant, after completing a Bachelor of Communications (Journalism) at UTS.
Linkedin
68th violation and once again 0 response from the brand, probably because whatever they’re doing is working well enough for them.
Surely this is an issue for their landlords rather than the toothless AANA? Seems another case of money talking loudest.
User ID not verified.
Have your say