Posted
on
News
by
Melinda Liszewski
· September 21, 2018 10:26 PM
·
1 reaction
The panel considered that the relevant audience for this advertisement would be broad and include children.
However, the best interests of children were disregarded because the sex trade has a right to promote its business, sexually objectifying and exploiting women.
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Coralie Alison
· November 11, 2016 11:53 AM
·
1 reaction
I was recently scrolling through social media when a disturbing sponsored ad showed up in my feed. It instantly didn't sit right with me.
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Melinda Liszewski
· October 12, 2016 6:47 PM
·
1 reaction
“The Board noted the images featuring a topless model next to an elephant. . . . and considered that the model’s nipples are not visible and while there is no need for the model to be topless this is not of itself a breach of the Code.”
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Melinda Liszewski
· September 28, 2016 5:00 PM
Man is fully clothed, woman wears body paint and yet “The Board noted that the woman’s nipples are sufficiently covered by body paint . . .”
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Coralie Alison
· September 27, 2016 12:47 PM
"Sexism is not always obviously violent, exploitative or degrading. It can be unintended or disguised innocently as humour, but it is always insidious, offensive to and exclusionary of its victims."
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Melinda Liszewski
· August 12, 2016 5:00 PM
"“…‘hot’ is an imprecise term… ‘hot girls’ does not clearly identify any group of women who could be considered to be unfairly treated"
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Melinda Liszewski
· August 10, 2016 5:00 PM
"the women are clothed in futuristic attire and positioned with their ‘weapons’ in an empowered way"
Read more
Posted
on
News
by
Melinda Liszewski
· August 10, 2016 4:00 PM
Complaint about porn brand advertising and its impact on children mischaracterised as complainant being "offended by images of lingerie clad women in shopping malls where children can see them."
Read more