The Advertising Standards Authority has ruled there are "no grounds to proceed" with multiple complaints that a 'Protect Marriage' ad was factually incorrect and styled to look like official voting information. Numerous complaints were made about the 'my marriage pledge' newspaper ad from the Family First spin-off Protect Marriage. It warned MPs who supported the marriage equality legislation that "If you vote to change marriage, We will vote to change you". L. Cleary complained: "the main body of the ad is deliberately styled to look like official voting information … by using the orange colour traditionally associated with voting information. In this way it is made to look like an official electioneering message, and is not ‘readily recognisable as an advertisement." Cleary also stated that the claims that "The politicians have ignored thousands of your submissions" and "They are ramming this bill through without giving it the due consideration and debate it deserves" were misleading, and that the identity of the advertiser was not clear. Others complained that the ad was offensive and discriminatory. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled the orange ballot box and style of the ad was contextually relevant, because its message "directly referred to political consequences at the next election for politicians who supported the passage of the Bill". It says it included the word "advertisement," which it believes clearly signalled the claims were opinion and not absolute fact. The crucial part of the ASA's ruling was that: "The Chairman said the statements in the advertisement were articulating that organisation's particular perspective about the proposed Bill rather than making factual claims regarding the Bill's progression through parliamentary processes and, as such the claims did not reach the threshold to be considered misleading." The Authority says while it does note the sincere and strongly-held views of people who complained, its Advocacy Principles state "People have the right to express their views and this right should not be unduly or unreasonably restricted by Rules."
Credit: GayNZ.com Daily News staff
First published: Saturday, 18th May 2013 - 7:47pm