Camilla Hansson, Sweden's current competitor to Miss Universe, models slimness in this ad, which was just banned by the ASA.
She's the "ambassador" for the Kazam mobile phone brand, which basically means we get to study her perfectly slender physique for 60 seconds to learn that the silly named phone too, is slim. This is of course what got the ad in trouble with the ASA, some of the shots of Camilla biting her lips, and dragging her fingers between her breasts yank us straight out of the "ironing in my underwear" scenario and as the complaints received pointed out are instead "overtly sexual and objectified women" and "bore no relationship to the product". Kazam Online played dumb in a response to the the ASA and insisted that the ad simply depicted a "well-known scenario - that is ironing a shirt in your underwear". It also said that it made sure that the spot was not aired during shows that children may be watching. Clearcast had noted the scenes were "slightly sexual", but decided they were not "gratuitous or likely to cause offence" and allowed the ad on air in December & January.
After receiving complaints the ASA considered that the ad was entirely about the woman in her underwear not the mobile phone and that scenes such as her running her finger over her cleavage were "sexually suggestive". They added: "Additionally, this was heightened by the suggestive nature of the music and voice-over and further reinforced because the focus on the woman bore no relevance to the advertised product."

There's actually a good idea here, lost in all the ogling. She irons her shirt and doesn't notice the phone in the pocket. Because it's that slim. 5.15 mm. If you ask me the ad should be also be reprimanded for calling the Kazam at 5.15 mm "The world's slimmest phone" when the oppo r5 is 4.85 mm. /GEEK

Ad Agency: Ogilvy & Mather, UK
Commercials: 
Country: 

Comments (4)

  • David Felton's picture
    David Felton

    There's an interesting insight here as you say, but the presentation does seem overtly sexual and unrelated to the product if you ask me. I'm not entirely sure, it's going to take several repeat viewings for me to come to an informed conclusion.

    Unrelated note - Funny how this came out of Ogilvy & Mather - David himself wrote "The most important word in the vocabulary of advertising is TEST. If you pretest your product with consumers, and pretest your advertising, you will do well in the marketplace." So you've got to wonder - did they test this with many women? I'm not saying the ASA was right to ban this ad, however.

    Feb 25, 2015
  • Dabitch's picture
    Dabitch

    > it's going to take several repeat viewings...

    Heh, I bet.

    55 seconds of Camilla Hansson in lingerie, and 5 spent on the - rather funny - insight was, pardon the pun, a great big wank. Since we're not selling lingerie, ASA is following the standards by banning this edit of the ad.
    It can be saved by cutting the lingerie-bit down and changing the music. Personally I don't see why they didn't just play it as funny in the first place.

    Feb 25, 2015
  • kidsleepy's picture
    kidsleepy

    I'm highly offended at this ad. It's 2015 and we're still showing women doing traditional household chores.
    SEE WHAT I DID THERE.

    This makes me want to run lingerie ads in the UK so people will complain and then I can say "we're selling lingerie, morons."

    "We're selling lingerie, morons," should probably be the tagline.

    Feb 26, 2015

Leave a comment

about the author

Dabitch Creative Director, CEO, hell-raising sweetheart and editor of Adland. Globetrotting Swede who has lived and worked in New York, London, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Stockholm.