Figleaves underwear advert sparks complaints
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A poster advert for a lingerie company featuring a woman in bra, knickers, stockings and stiletto shoes has prompted complaints it was "offensive" and unsuitable for display where it might be seen by children.
Figleaves said it presented its products "in the utmost of good taste" and did not believe the advert was "offensive or salacious in any way".
The underwear company added that it did not appear within 100 metres of a school and believed there was "no question" of who the poster was aimed at.
It also said it did not think the advert had caused widespread or serious offence because it had attracted just five complaints.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) did not uphold the complainants' objections and said no further action was necessary.
"We noted the complainants' concerns that the ad was overtly sexual but we noted also that the ad did not show any nudity and that the image used was relevant to Figleaves.
"We understood that the ad may not appeal to everyone. However, we considered that, given the context, which was for underwear, the ad was not overtly sexual and therefore, it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence to those who saw it."
PA
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments