Pretty Polly pulled up over billboard ad for tights

A complaint against Pretty Polly tights over a recent billboard advertisement which featured a semi-naked woman has been upheld by the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland. A number of men and women objected to the advertisement for Secret Slimmers tights. It portrayed a model initially wearing a pair of tights with her arm covering her bare breasts, and then wearing tights and a dress.

In its December bulletin, the ASAI complaints committee said the image would be acceptable in fashion magazines but not on billboards. It said the advertisement "had caused offence by addressing a much wider audience" and requested the company exercise greater sensitivity in future.

Mr Stuart Fogarty, managing director of AFA advertising, which was responsible for the advertisement, rejected the complaint as "illogical. Why would Pretty Polly want to spend money on offending women? They would be cutting off their own nose."

Ms Helen Atkins, marketing director of Pretty Polly, said it had no intention of causing offence. "Our target market is women, without whose goodwill our product would not sell. Our advertising policy is to display the product to the best advantage and to empower women and to play a part in positive advertising."

A complaint against mobile phone company Cellular World over a recent advertisement showing the damaged ear of US boxer, Evander Holyfield, was also upheld on grounds of taste and decency.

The newspaper advertisement contained the headline "Our competitors bit off more than they could chew" beside a photograph of the ear, part of which had been bitten off. The committee said the image had caused offence and told the company to take account of public reaction when preparing future advertisements.

Of nine other complaints considered by the committee, six were upheld on grounds of being misleading or in breach of the codes of practice.

The ASAI said it was unable to pass judgment on a poster advertisement for the anti-abortion group Family and Life, which showed a foetus and a slogan, as it was outside the scope of the codes. However, the committee expressed its concern at the distress caused by the advertisement and forwarded the complaints to the advertiser.