- Home
- News & Blogs
- About Us
- What We Do
- Our Communities
- Info Centre
- Press
- Contact
- Archive 2019
- 2015 Elections: 11 new BME MP’s make history
- 70th Anniversary of the Partition of India
- Black Church Manifesto Questionnaire
- Brett Bailey: Exhibit B
- Briefing Paper: Ethnic Minorities in Politics and Public Life
- Civil Rights Leader Ratna Lachman dies
- ELLE Magazine: Young, Gifted, and Black
- External Jobs
- FeaturedVideo
- FeaturedVideo
- FeaturedVideo
- Gary Younge Book Sale
- George Osborne's budget increases racial disadvantage
- Goldsmiths Students' Union External Trustee
- International Commissioners condemn the appalling murder of Tyre Nichols
- Iqbal Wahhab OBE empowers Togo prisoners
- Job Vacancy: Head of Campaigns and Communications
- Media and Public Relations Officer for Jean Lambert MEP (full-time)
- Number 10 statement - race disparity unit
- Pathway to Success 2022
- Please donate £10 or more
- Rashan Charles had no Illegal Drugs
- Serena Williams: Black women should demand equal pay
- Thank you for your donation
- The Colour of Power 2021
- The Power of Poetry
- The UK election voter registration countdown begins now
- Volunteering roles at Community Alliance Lewisham (CAL)
ASA fails to protect Naomi Campbell
Once again the Advertising Standards Agency has shown itself to be a blunt instrument in setting standards of decency in British Advertising. Its crude judgment claimed that Cadbury’s Bliss Ad that likened Naomi Campbell to a chocolate bar was not ‘racist’ and sought only to refer to her as a ‘Diva’.
Whilst nobody disputes Cadbury’s likened Ms Campbell to a diva, the question OBV and many Black people argued was that, the ‘Diva’ in question was a ‘chocolate bar’ – a racial insult used to taunt black children.This we pointed out was insensitive at best and offensive at worst, not just to Ms Campbell but to Black people in general.
With all the high powered, high salaried staff at ASA it was beyond their intellect to articulate a nuanced approach. They could, for example, have stated:
'We are not taking action in this case but we would like advertisers to avoid causing unnecessary offence even if, as in this case, it clearly wasn't intended’.
That approach would have meant no censorship against Cadbury’s but the lesson to be more diligent made loud and clear.
Instead their crude judgment gives comfort to those who claim, ‘you had no right to raise the issue’. Well, any Black parent whose child has come home in tears because he or she has been called ‘chocolate bar’ knows different. It is demeaning and offensive.
Ironically, when the story broke in America, for most African Americans the issue was a no brainer. Crude stereotyping even by default is unacceptable. Kraft, the US based parent company quickly understood that and acted promptly - and issued an apology – to avoid offending its global customer base.
Sadly but not too unsurprisingly the ASA have missed a real opportunity of leadership; the type of leadership that doesn’t have to use the legislative stick to make a point. They could have quietly demanded that all companies are mindful about causing unnecessary offence. As Naomi Campbell suggested, that might be achieved if company Boards and senior management teams are more diverse.
Simon Woolley