Can you spot the difference between these two ads? Is one more
harmful than the other? Apparently so. The Advertising Standards
Authority has decided that the poster on the right for fashion
brand Missguided, with the model in the pink wrap mini-dress,
showing her legs and cleavage did not breach the CAP Code rules on
harm and offense. The poster on the left, however, with the
same model wearing an unbuttoned jacket with nothing underneath,
crossed the line of acceptability, tripping into the territory of
offensiveness, as defined by the ASA.
In their response, Missguided asserted that "promoting and
encouraging female empowerment" was extremely important to
their business. And I am sure we can all agree, nothing says
"female empowerment" quite like an image of a woman
wearing a jacket with nothing underneath, as well as sheer
stockings, sheer gloves and high heeled shoes. Misgguided said they
strongly contested that either image was overly sexualised
