306
Billboards featuring OnlyFans model ruled ‘not overtly sexual’ by UK advertising watchdog
(www.euronews.com)
I've seen worse ads about perfume
this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
306 points (96.4% liked)
World News
32296 readers
769 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
On one hand, I find nothing wrong with the photograph.
On the other hand, I’m sick of fucking OnlyFans spam online, it’s disgusting to see more spam in real life.
Also billboards as a whole can get fucked.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Remember jeans ads from the 90s? Jeans were all they had on!
In the 2000s women were straight up having orgasms in shampoo commercials.
French guys 40 upwards were having their first orgasm to shampoo adverts
Good times
load more comments
(1 replies)
Those were the days, B&W pictures of coked-up anorexic Calvin Klein jeans models shot topless from the back with maybe a bit of sideboob depending on where they put their arm.
load more comments
(2 replies)
My thoughts exactly.
They are overtly sexual.... but not moreso than many other ads.
But is it about what’s directly on the billboard, or about what it’s advertising?
Like, Pornhub could make a billboard with nothing risqué on it, but the fact that it’s advertising a porn website would be an issue wouldn’t it?
Maybe not, I’m just curious tbh.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
It's no different than seeing a Victoria's Secret or Calvin Klein billboard, IMHO.
It's completely tame. There are far more sexual images in just about any direction. It's only because people know there's actual nakedness being advertised that anyone has a problem with it. And that's just silly.
load more comments
(12 replies)
Victoria's Secret
I gotchu
Queen Victoria and her husband (and also her cousin) Prince Albert popularized the custom of Christmas Trees in 1848 when Albert sent decorated trees to schools and army barracks around Windsor.
Prince Albert was apparently hung like a horse.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Not only did the billboard work, but now that news outlets are posting it, with her @ and all, she’s likely getting so much more attention/subs.
Genius.
Yeah she nailed this.
nailed.
Heh
Is it a good or a bad thing when you're told your onlyfans ad can stay because it's not sexy enough?
It can be sexy without being sexual
It is sexual, but not overtly sexual.
I think she'd be proud she nailed the legally distinct line between selling sex and sex sells.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The only problem with this is the fact that it's an advertisement. At least in the US, you cant drive down a country highway without seeing at least one advertisement for a strip club.
You can in Vermont and Hawaii, where billboards are illegal.
Hey, I did notice that driving down in Vermont, it makes for such clean looking highways and cities! We need to bring this regulation to Quebec.
Maine has a similar law too I believe.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Come to Denmark where we have advertising on busses with full on boobs in full show. It's advertiseing for breast implants btw
load more comments
(1 replies)
Who are these people that pay for pornography?
Who are the people who pay for netflix instead of torrenting? Someone has to.
Guilty as charged. Netflix has a lot of good content and their app works well so I don't mind paying for it, though I still put on my eyepatch from time to time when I want to watch something they don't have.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
They consulted Twitch mods and they said it's ok.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Billboards erected in London showing model Eliza Rose Watson in underwear advertising her OnlyFans account page have been cleared by the UK regulator following complaints that they were inappropriate for children to see.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received 30 complaints stating that the posters seen in Harrow, Tottenham, Lambeth and Edgware in June and July featured adult content and were inappropriate.
ASA said that although Watson’s clothing was revealing, the image did not feature any nudity, and the pose adopted by her was “no more than mildly sexual."
“While we acknowledged that the image of Ms Watson and reference to OnlyFans might be distasteful to some, we considered that because the ad was not overtly sexual and did not objectify women, we therefore concluded it was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.”
The ASA continued: “The ad was shown on several posters throughout London, which was an untargeted medium, and was therefore likely to be seen by a large number of people, including children.”
Commenting on the reaction to the billboards, she said: "If people are offended by my ad, I'm assuming they're also complaining about Ann Summers and Jack Daniels ones.
The original article contains 408 words, the summary contains 194 words. Saved 52%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Summary fails to mention who the billboards erected.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Heh heh heh. They said “erected”.
Nobody will think of the children if they can't infringe on our rights to privacy and freedom, right?
So it's like, a porn advert? I kind of assumed that wasn't a thing.
view more: next ›