To feel vindicated that John Lewis has pulled its awful ad with the boy in the dress trashing the house?

[Clymene]

I wrote to the ASA and complained. I said the ad was misleading (as into insurance will cover wilful damage), sexist (with a boy rampaging through the house and destroying his mother and sister's things, and sexualised.

I also called John Lewis and told them I hated it and why.

They've withdrawn it.

GOOD

Dread to think what their Christmas advert will be like after this debacle...

Santa in drag nicking the presents instead of leaving them. Leaving on a cow that identifies as a reindeer, which trashes the house.

@Clymene

Well done for complaining. It's the kind of thing many people (me included) thought about fleetingly but then never got round to. It's because of people like you who actually take action that things change.

Thank you from me.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

I agree they shouldn't put out misleading adverts, although I mean surely you read the small print anyway. I thought it was a nice advert in a world full of miserable shit.

But clearly I am in the minority and apparently means it's okay to personally attack me.

I suppose "in a world full of miserable shit" excludes people who respond anonymously to an op asking if they've nothing better to do. Nice. Back at you really.

Bloody well done @Clymene, that advert was horrible and JL should be ashamed.

I do hope the little lad understands he is not to blame at all.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

Have you nothing better to do?

Give over

@Quinquagesima

John Lewis fuck up again. What a surprise.

I will never buy anything from them again, as they closed my local branch. They can fuck off with their 'all our customers want to shop online'. Some do, but lots don't.

I suspect the main reason that "all our customers want to shop online" is because shops are often treated like glorified showrooms these days, they hold very little stock you can take home today.

I've just watched the ad on YouTube. That kid would get the biggest telling off from me . Totally disrespectful to the home and property. Can't believe anyone thought this was a good 'creative' idea to sell home insurance.

I used to work in advertising and I’ve no idea how the script got approved by the ASA given that it was for a financial product.

I’m glad it’s been withdrawn. There were so many things wrong with it.

[quote ChesapeakeEmbarrassed]@Clymene

Well done for complaining. It's the kind of thing many people (me included) thought about fleetingly but then never got round to. It's because of people like you who actually take action that things change.

Thank you from me.[/quote]
Aww thank you!

@Seeingadistance

I was glad to hear this on the news today. Dreadful advert, in every way.

Agreed. What on earth JL were thinking I cannot fathom. Really really off putting.

Having had some experience supporting advertising development for banks etc, I was amazed this as was ever created. We’ve been asked to defend in detail every claim made directly or implied in ads

@Interrobanger

I used to work in advertising and I’ve no idea how the script got approved by the ASA given that it was for a financial product.

I’m glad it’s been withdrawn. There were so many things wrong with it.

Not ASA. Clearcast.

Whatever

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

Have you nothing better to do?

Au contraire. That was a valuable use of time.

I saw it once and once was enough. I didn’t see all the trashing the brat in the silly dress was doing due to being horrified by the spectacle. What woke bell was that? John Lewis have egg on their faces. The ad company saw then coming and led them by the nose to agree to utter rubbish.

…woke hell

@Interrobanger

I used to work in advertising and I’ve no idea how the script got approved by the ASA given that it was for a financial product.

I’m glad it’s been withdrawn. There were so many things wrong with it.

I agree.

I was very surprised that this ever to got approved by whatever powers that be in JL who would know that this would need to pass these guidelines in the first place.

And yes... many things wrong with it.

@ScrambledSmegs

I'm glad it's gone, it was misleading about the terms of the home insurance they were selling which could have had serious real-world consequences.

Also, the only way that wilfully destructive behaviour could be construed as 'joyful' is if the kid is supposed to be a budding psychopath.

This is what I found most odd about it.

I can sort of see the idea of trying to portray a kid at home who wants to be in theatre getting dressed up in the mum's clothes and being overly dramatic around the house and that resulting in the odd knocked item or other accident. (Though I do wonder how much of the idea of him being an 'actor' getting carried away was made up after the fact).

But what they portrayed with the extent of the mess in the parents' bedroom and the slamming the paints on to the floor then smearing them everywhere - I don't know a mother who wouldn't find that to be out and out bad behaviour.

It made me wonder if any of the people involved were parents who'd ever had any significant experience of being the primary carer for their kids (yes - I'm deliberately excluding dads).

Top marks for complaining. The ad was THE worst.

@Interrobanger

Yes I’m amazed it got past the ASA - I’ve had lists of questions from the ASA to defend advertising claims and they have literally wanted us to justify lines used in a song, they tend to leave no stone unturned!

I couldn’t give a tiny fuck that it was a boy in a dress. I was annoyed that this child was allowed to rampage around the house trashing it with the idea that it was ok because they could just claim on the insurance.

My only guess is that the actual shoot strayed some way from the storyboard that was signed off and drifted from exuberance into wilful destruction.

@LastToBePicked

My only guess is that the actual shoot strayed some way from the storyboard that was signed off and drifted from exuberance into wilful destruction.

In the mind of the director, yes. You can see that from the camera angles that it was all thoroughly deliberate and intentional. Unfortunately this made it look contrived rather than like a kid playing dress-up and getting carried away with it all.

[quote LastToBePicked]@Interrobanger

Yes I’m amazed it got past the ASA - I’ve had lists of questions from the ASA to defend advertising claims and they have literally wanted us to justify lines used in a song, they tend to leave no stone unturned![/quote]
I’ve had feedback from Clearcast and the ASA on scripts before saying that a shot with a front garden needs to have a gated fence round it because of safety. And that we couldn’t say a toothpaste was ‘whitening’, but that it could improve the ‘appearance of whiteness’. They are so pedantic, I can’t fathom how it got signed off. Unless they were wokeblinded by the stunning bravery and just waved it on through.

Feel sorry for the child actor who has had his big moment canned amidst controversy. But it was a shit advert which gave out all the wrong messages and was wilfully misleading. Shame on you John Lewis