Tiger Beer ladyboy ad banned for casting sex slur
LONDON - A Tiger Beer poster ad depicting a ladyboy and a bottle of Tiger Beer as two of the Far East's most desirable exports has been banned by the advertising watchdog for linking exports with the sex trade and disrespecting Eastern culture.
Meanwhile, Stella Artois has escaped censure over its TV ad about brewing since 1366 despite 94 complaints that it misleadingly implied maize had been used as a brewing agent since that time.
The Tiger Beer ad, created by CHI & Partners, appeared on posters and in the Metro and sister freesheet paper London Lite.
It featured a small image of a bottle of Tiger Beer in the top left-hand corner labelled as "The Far East's most desirable export since 1932". In the foreground there was a large image of a man wearing black stockings, knickers and a bra with a star saying "3rd" placed over his groin.

The Advertising Standards Authority received eight complaints from people who said the image of the person, who some believed to be a woman, was offensive because it linked exports with a person in a sexually provocative pose, which they felt was inappropriate given reports of human trafficking for the sex trade.
Some of the complainants also objected that the ad was offensive and disrespectful to Eastern culture because it implied beer and sex were some of the best things to come out of the region.
Tiger Beer defended the ad saying that ladyboys, which generally refers to a male-to-female transgender person or an effeminate gay male in Thailand, were a famous export of the Far East worldwide and the image in the ad was representative of a cabaret performer rather than a prostitute or model.
The campaign was intended to reflect Tiger Beer's Far Eastern heritage by presenting it in the context of other recognised exports including ladyboys, tuk tuks, chop sticks and acupuncture.
However, Tiger Beer said that since running the ads it realised members of the public beyond the target audience could have misinterpreted them and has decided to remove the ladyboy image from the campaign.
The ASA upheld the complaints noting that the ad was likely to be seen by many consumers outside of its target audience, particularly when appearing in the untargeted poster medium.
It considered that by presenting the character in sexual clothing and a provocative pose alongside the implication that they were rated the Far East's third most desirable export, the ad appeared to link exports with the sex trade and, potentially, human trafficking.
The advertising watchdog also decided that the ad suggested beer and sex were two of the best exports of the Far East, which was disrespectful to Eastern culture.
In the Stella Artois adjudication, the ASA decided not to uphold complaints from 94 viewers who thought that its TV ad was misleading because they did not believe that maize had been used as a brewing agent since 1366.
Some of the viewers also challenged whether the ad, created by Lowe, misleadingly implied Stella Artois had been brewed in its current form since 1366.
The ASA noted that there was no evidence to show maize was used in brewing beer in the 14th century in Leuven, but considered that the clearly fictional context of the ad, with its fantastical elements and dramatic imagery, meant viewers were unlikely to misinterpret the onscreen text "the finest hops, the purest water, maize and barley" as a literal claim about the ingredients in 14th century beer.
Tiger Beer: innappropriate use of ladyboys
Tags
- United Kingdom |
- FMCG |
- Europe |
- Drink |
- Advertising



Comments
Dean Webb - 26/11/2008
Eight complaints.
Richard Hayter - 26/11/2008
Complaining is turning into the UK's #1 pastime. To receive only 8 is pretty poor these days.
David Pearce - 26/11/2008
I too would like to complain about the paltry number of complaints. Also, check out the ad by google below for 'Pretty Ladyboys'- dare you to click it!
Andy Knell - 26/11/2008
Pulling this ad is what's in poor taste, its simply takes advantage of a social phenomenon to create a tongue in cheek campaign. The ASA needs to get with the programme.
Graham Pugh - 26/11/2008
It is a crass, dumb and pathetically sniggering piece of advertising though. But I wouldn't complain in case it encourages them...
Andy Knell - 26/11/2008
Its not a Waitrose ad I grant you, but it has a certain rustic charm. Doesnt it allude to the freedom of expression celebrated in certain parts of the Far East? We are reminded of the extrovert, colourful nature of our Thai cousins. I am sure their Tourism Board could run with this.
Graham Pugh - 26/11/2008
Andy, you're natural born account man. I'm sold. Almost...
Graham Pugh - 26/11/2008
Andy, you're a natural born account man. I'm sold. Almost...
dano - 26/11/2008
she is hot- i would
John Gallen - 26/11/2008
What's the 2nd biggest export then?
Dominic Gudgeon - 26/11/2008
Who the hell exports? Surely that's the whole point of going on holiday to the Far East. They're importing US.
Archie Strang - 26/11/2008
Having read about this ad on your marvellous site, I feel the need to complain in the strongest terms possible. Someone needs to tell the Mail and get the message out there. Absolutely disgusting.
Graham Pugh - 26/11/2008
I blame Jonathan Ross.
Oliver Gandy - 26/11/2008
If only Diana was here
Eddie Bongo - 26/11/2008
But how do they hide it so well?
Amod Munga - 27/11/2008
Wow. That Russell Brand sure cleans up nicely.
david ridings - 27/11/2008
Jesus - storm in a pint-glass. About the only part of the ASA's ruling I'd agree with is the 'untargeted poster medium' - i.e. kids could see it, but even then. Maybe next time they should go more cryptic, and juxtapose with a ping pong ball. d
William Howard - 27/11/2008
Aren't beer and sex the best things to come out of ANY region, not just the East?
Eliska Dobson - 27/11/2008
I agree that too many things are being complained about, however I did too find this add a bit innappropriate.
William Howard - 27/11/2008
Also, this is just a general point, but why is it that the views of people who complain get preferential treatment? Is there something about complaining's innate worth that means that the wrath of those who do complain must be appeased at all costs? What would happen if thousands of people wrote in to the ASA for no purpose other than to say that they thoroughly enjoyed the ad? It saddens me to say, probably nothing, and the whiners would get their way regardless. Thoughts?
Georgina Kok - 19/02/2009
It's easy to say that the ad was no big deal. I agree that some complaints are unwarranted and don't make any difference to anyone's lives. But bear in mind that the ad doesn't say that the person's a ladyboy, therefore you can mistake her/him for an Oriental woman. So if you never experienced walking down the street, and a gang of fellas yelling at you 'Sucky, sucky, 10 dollars!' you'll never know what the big deal is.