Blind footballers and twerking businessmen: the most complained about adverts of 2016 revealed

Moneysupermarket's epic dance-off ad received hundreds of comp;aints for being 'overtly sexual'
Tom Powell19 January 2017

A Moneysupermarket advert featuring a body-popping bouncer was the most complained about ad of 2016.

The advert, which shows Gary the bodyguard grooving in a suit and sunglasses, prompted over 1,000 complaints to watchdog the Advertising Standards Agency, with many stating his moves were “not suitable to be seen by children”.

The consumer website’s twerking businessmen and car-park dance-off adverts were also in the top five, with hundreds of TV watchers complaining they were “overtly sexual”.

However, the ASA ruled that none of the adverts “crossed the line between bad taste and offence” and therefore none was banned.

Gary the Bodyguard received over 1,000 complaints for his 'unsuitable' dance moves

A Paddy Power ad featuring blind footballers who allude to kicking a cat which made its way onto the pitch received 450 complaints from people who felt it was offensive to blind people or encouraged animal cruelty.

But the ASA noted that the ad was supported by members of the England Blind Football Team and that the majority of viewers would find it humorous, not offensive.

Also in the top five was an advert for Match.com, which received almost 900 complaints for its “sexually explicit” scene in which a woman returns home to her female partner who removes her top and passionately kisses her.

None of the dance-themed adverts was banned by the ASA despite the barrage of complaints

ASA Chief Executive Guy Parker said: “The ads that attract the highest number of complaints are often not the ones that need banning.

“Our action leads to thousands of ads being amended or withdrawn each year, mostly for being misleading, but there wasn’t one misleading ad in the top 10.”

He said a number of the most complained about ads “sought to present a positive statement about diversity but were in fact seen by some as doing the opposite”.

“In all those cases, we thought people generally would see the ads in a positive light and that the boundary between bad taste and serious or widespread offence had been navigated well enough, often through using sensible scheduling restrictions,” he added.

“Advertising that pushes the boundaries invariably lands better with some people than others. But last year we thought the ads that attracted the largest number of complaints fell the right side of the line.”

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in