Kane & Lynch Ads Banned... Five Months After Release

April 9, 2008 -
Better late than never?

That could be the operative phrase at the UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which, according to the Guardian, has just sanctioned an ad campaign for Eidos' Kane & Lynch.

The game, which garnered unimpressive reviews, launched on November 13th of last year - which makes the ASA's order that no K&L ads be reprinted or rebroadcast a bit pointless.

The ASA said that it had received 26 complaints and that the poster at left was "graphic and too shocking to be seen in an untargeted medium". From the Guardian:
The ad was used a double-page spread in Future Publishing's computer game magazine Edge, while a second version appeared in the magazine Total Film...

Ruling on the Kane & Lynch poster... the ASA said it was "likely to be seen as condoning and glorifying real violence", and was also irresponsible and "likely to cause serious or widespread offence".

From the ASA's report, as cited by the Guardian:
We noted that the demographic profile of the magazines that carried the ads was predominantly adult males and that only a small number of children were likely to have seen the ads.

We considered, however, that the graphic and shocking image, which would be seen as condoning and glorifying real violence, was likely to cause distress to some readers and was unsuitable for children to see. We therefore concluded that the placement of the ads was irresponsible.

Comments

@ MonkeyPeaches, TheEdge

Hey, don't knock Rosie - big girls rock! VIVA LA BBW!

*Runs*

This is Britain!!!!!!!! So it's rules are very different from America's.

How often does this agency ban things? If they are this easuly offended, then I imagine that they would censor a pretty large amount of ads. Could someone that lives in the UK please enlighten me?

Britain doesn't need to make sense with some things.

"Big brother is watching you"

Sometime I find that Western world is more commie than the real communist.

I hate to say it, but you have to look at this the same way you do cigaretts or alcohol. The government isn't/can't really control who sees the content of most ads. The only way to ensure that children do not pick up a gaming magazine from the grocery store is to put it in the "adult" section like you would find the pornographic magazines.

It's sad, it really is, but you have understand that these large companies place these ads in sections that will get to a younger audience while trying to attempt to look like they aren't. They do it on purpose. My kids will grow up playing video games because they love them, and I love them, but I don't think that subjecting 12 year old to the same type of violence and advertising as and 18 year old is good practice.

They didn't ban anyone from selling/playing the game, they simply restricted something that they saw to be a potential hazard to a younger audience. I"m not saying it's an awesome move, an all inclusive move, or even a move that will actually accomplish something but what they did was legal, and completely within their jurisdiction to do so.

They didn't base their decision entirely on the magazine add alone and that is the key to remember. There were giant posters hanging in outside windows of game stores in public (at the mall) where thousands of children walk by a day. I'm sure that the magazine add was the smallest on their list of reasons to ban all advertisements.

It completely saddens me that we have to rely on an outside body to enforce these types of "ethics", if you will, because business no longer hold the courage or self decency to say "I'm not going to sell it" just because it makes them money. Just like with nearly everything else in the world, principle is lost.

[...] (Sources: GamePolitics, Gaming Today) Technorati tags: Kane and Lynch, Eidos [...]

@ lorenzo

quote
hmmm Ok so a quick google found circulation averages of around 31k for Edge and 85k Total Film per month…so 120000 adverts in circulation generated 26 complaints. 0.021% or to put it another way 99.979 people had no issue whatsoever.
end quote

You forget, every complaint written is representative of 99 other people that didn't write. So, each complaint = 100 people. Thus, 2600 complaints. That almost half of the users. The thought that so many people were offended just scare the chickens out of me. What has the world come to where people can get scared by a poster?

yes brits are too sensitive....

its the ultimate Nanny state.

you can't walk down the street without someone telling you what to do because its just "better" or "healthier".

Fucking hate this place.

Cheers Bob.

Lets just Censor everything. Ban everything wrap people in cotton wool and then everyone will be disensitized.

Like what the governments doing.

B$stards.

Just had a quick look at the ASA website and it looks like all they need is one complaint and they can tell people to pull ads.

During a quick search I found a couple for Play.com that got upheld (i.e. pulled) all because someone misunderstood one of their adverts and wasn't getting a DVD as cheap as he thought they would.

Just as long as they don;t get involved in video game classification otherwise nothing would ever get released here.

@ koichan

True, but man that game just sucked. Also side note GTA IV soon *dances the saftey dance* Yep I'm doing the safety dance, I'm acting like world governments doing that WAY to late.

I was edited - fair enough, sorry for the lapse.

How the hell do they call the magazines an "untargeted medium" and then go on to say "the demographic profile of the magazines that carried the ads was predominantly adult males," they just said two things that were complete opposite of one another. Maybe I just know nothing about marketing and am misunderstanding the definition of "untargeted medium" but based on the word "untargeted" and the context it was used i would assume they're talking about a giant bill-board, or the side of a bus, you know something that just about everyone who falls under the demographic of "walking or driving down a street" would see not something that mainly people in the demographic of "adult males" would see. Anyone want to clear this up for me or am I correct in my assumption?
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Who's responsible for crappy Netflix performance on Verizon?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sleaker@james_fudge - hopefully that's the case, but I wont hold my breath for it to happen.07/25/2014 - 1:08pm
SleakerUpdate on crytek situation is a bit ambiguous, but I'm glad they finally said something: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-07-25-crytek-addresses-financial-situation07/25/2014 - 1:07pm
E. Zachary KnightMan Atlas, Why do you not want me to have any money? Why? http://www.atlus.com/tears2/07/25/2014 - 12:06pm
Matthew WilsonI agree with that07/25/2014 - 10:45am
james_fudgeI think Twitch will have more of an impact on how YouTube/Google Plus work than the other way around.07/25/2014 - 10:22am
IanCWelp, twitch is going to suck now. Thanks google.07/25/2014 - 6:30am
Sleaker@MP - Looked up hitbox, thanks.07/24/2014 - 9:40pm
Matthew WilsonI agree, but to me given other known alternatives google seems to the the best option.07/24/2014 - 6:30pm
Andrew EisenTo be clear, I have no problem with Google buying it, I'm just concerned it will make a slew of objectively, quantifiably bad changes to Twitch just as it's done with YouTube over the years.07/24/2014 - 6:28pm
Matthew WilsonI doubt yahoo has the resources to pull it off, and I not just talking about money.07/24/2014 - 6:15pm
SleakerI wouldn't have minded a Yahoo purchase, probably would have been a better deal than Tumblr seeing as they paid the same for it...07/24/2014 - 6:13pm
MaskedPixelanteIt's the golden age of Hitbox, I guess.07/24/2014 - 6:08pm
Matthew Wilsonagain twitch was going to get bought. It was just who was going to buy it . Twitch was not even being able to handle the demand, so hey needed a company with allot of infrastructure to help them. I can understand why you would not want Google to buy it .07/24/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew Eisen"Google is better than MS or Amazon" Wow. Google, as I mentioned earlier, progressively makes almost everything worse and yet there are still two lesser options. Again, wow!07/24/2014 - 5:43pm
Andrew EisenI don't know. MS, in my experience, is about 50/50 on its products. It's either fine or it's unusable crap. Amazon, well... I've never had a problem buying anything from them but I don't use any of their products or services so I couldn't really say.07/24/2014 - 5:42pm
Matthew WilsonGoogle is better than MS or Amazon.07/24/2014 - 5:33pm
Sleaker@AE - I've never seen youtube as a great portal to interact with people from a comment perspective. like ever. The whole interface doesn't really promote that.07/24/2014 - 5:28pm
Andrew EisenNor I. From a content producer's perspective, almost every change Google implements makes the service more cumbersome to use. It's why I set up a Facebook fan page in the first place; it was becoming too difficult to connect with my viewers on YouTube.07/24/2014 - 4:50pm
Sleakerwonder if anyone is going to try and compete with google, I'm not a huge fan of the way they manage their video services.07/24/2014 - 4:41pm
Andrew EisenIt happened. Google bought Twitch. http://venturebeat.com/2014/07/24/googles-1b-purchase-of-twitch-confirmed-joins-youtube-for-new-video-empire/07/24/2014 - 4:28pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician