Good for entertainment, bad for ads?

It's amazing how youngsters latch on to every word of today's super hit songs. I had to look up a Web site to know that the song ‘ Sheila ki jawani' goes like this: ‘I know you want it; But you never gonna get it; Tere haath kabhi na aani '.

‘Sheila ki jawani' , and many more such examples in a multitude of languages, are all part of the content we find suitable for national family consumption today — in cinemas or on television.

Young children are also part of reality shows on TV, singing and even dancing to these hits.

But when it comes to television commercials, we seem to be a lot more stringent as a nation, albeit with no clear definition of what can be aired and what cannot.

Same Medium, Different Standards

The first ad for Amul Macho was found suggestive enough to be banned, arguably with good reason. But there are some bans that are more debatable.

Models and actors in lingerie — and other forms of skimpy clothing abound, across media, including newspapers. But an ad featuring a male model in his Lux Cozy brief getting a peck on his cheek, from a woman looking for her dog (to find it tugging at his towel by the pool), didn't find the going lucky. It was banned. Woman enters room, finds male model in VIP Frenchie, doors close — also banned!

Why, even a woman's undergarment on a clothesline seeking out a male brief (VIP Frenchie again) a few floors below was not acceptable to some — there were no models, mind you, just the two pieces of clothing.

Bipasha Basu in Beedi jalaile jigar se piya is fine for us morally upright Indians, but not the ‘chocolate man' for deodorant brand Axe's new variant. Sensationalism of the Rakhi Sawant variety can drive a man to suicide, and we're okay with watching that sort of family content.But a Fastrack ad featuring a young woman taking off her undergarment to highlight the fact that ‘20 per cent off can mean a lot' was found unacceptable for telecast by some channels, never mind the fact that there was absolutely no skin on show.

Towards one standard

To be sure, there are ads on air that make family viewing an uncomfortable affair. But what is a good enough standard for programming content — be it on reality or fiction shows or movies — should be the same for advertising content on the same channel. This doesn't seem the case today.

The lack of uniformity in evaluating content can be attributed to the fact that the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) handles ad-related complaints; the newly formalised Broadcasting Content Complaints Council invites viewer complaints on channels' content; and film content is approved prior to release by the Censor Board of Film Certification, which, by default, qualifies it for telecast depending on the certification.

A few ‘beeps' on the cuss words, blurs and edits of a few scenes, and the content is as safe as Mickey Mouse for our kids!

The problem goes beyond the existence of three different bodies responsible for controlling advertising, programming and film content, all of which converge on television sets in Indian homes.

A film maker reminds us that the Censor Board has been accused in the past of double standards. There are critics of ASCI in the advertising and marketing universe on that count too. But given that these are the systems we have and, by and large, they seem to be working too, can we get them to allow one standard that applies to all content on television?

In ‘Incredible India', advertising content seems to be more stringently criticised and controlled. . It has to do with competition, we are told — with each company quick to pull down a contestable ad of a rival that seems to work in the market.

An ad industry veteran pointed out that matrimonial ads seeking and offering ‘fair' brides aren't created by corporate houses and their agencies. The fairness cream ads were reflective of society, he reasoned. Television commercials should also be reflective of the other forms of content we consume.

It's only fair that we allow our television advertising the same leeway for use of edgy humour and elements like sex appeal that we do to other entertainment content. After all, advertising has to entertain for it to engage the same consumers, on the same media that beams Munni badnaam hui . And that Munni was good enough for us to accept as the face of a pain reliever.

COMMENT NOW