Burnout advert branded "irresponsible" by ASA

By Games Industry.biz Published 27 June, 2007

EA responds by dumping it.

The Advertising Standards Authority has branded a poster for Electronic Arts title Burnout Dominator as "irresponsible" following complaints from members of the public.

An ASA spokesperson told GamesIndustry.biz that 37 complaints were received about the advert, which depicted a crashed car surrounded by broken glass and featured the slogan: "Inner peace through outer violence."

"The complainants described the advert as offensive as it condoned and was likely to encourage violence, dangerous driving and anti-social behaviour such as vandalism," the spokesperson said.

"The Advertising Standards Authority determined that the implication of the advertisment was likely to cause serious or widespread offence."

The ASA also found that the image of the car and reference to violence in the slogan "could be seen to condone a violent lifestyle, anti-social behaviour or dangerous driving" and that the poster was "therefore in breach of advertising codes".

Electronic Arts was given the opportunity to defend the poster, and said it was clear the advert was for a videogame and was not condoning violence. However, EA will abide by the ASA's instruction that the ad is not to appear again "in its current form".

The ASA has also recommended that in future EA seeks advice from the copy advice team of the commitee of advertising practice.

It's all kicking off on GamesIndustry.biz.

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (61) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • souljacker2000 #1 5 years ago

    haha i cant c why people take this stuff so seriously... its a game ffs. I dont know any1 who takes the in game world into real world situations...

    if some 1 sees the advert are they gona really wana drive as fast as possible and think they r gona get points for crashing into other road users or anything like that

    btw still half asleep so hope makes sense

  • Wayne #2 5 years ago

    "I dont know any1 who takes the in game world into real world situations... "

    Well if you don't know anyone that does, it is very much apparent then that no one does.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #3 5 years ago

    Wasn't there a complaint back when Burnout 2 was released too? I remember showing a ticket for speeding gave you a small discount? I'm not sure though.

  • menage #4 5 years ago

    Pff. I'm getting sick of this watchdog mentality. Fuck them, I'm getting in my car now.

  • souljacker2000 #5 5 years ago

    @wayne

    spot on. I know every1.

  • aldo_14 #6 5 years ago

    Do u knw vry 1? Wow. 133T.

    Etc.

  • Moz #7 5 years ago

    I guess that was stepping over the mark a little.

    Just hope this doesn't spill over into another violence in games is wrong argument!!

    Cos personally I find the violence in games makes me a more relax in real life. People just have to except the humans are violent creatures. Maybe if the world leaders played more violent computer games then the world would be a more peaceful place.

  • kangarootoo #8 5 years ago

    Bloody idiots. It was a daft slogan to try and get away with.

    If they didn't expect this response, someone wasn't doing their job properly.

    @souljacker2000

    What the hell is with this replacing one with 1 all the time. This isn't the 80s you know. ;)

  • Rich72 #9 5 years ago

    I wish they had banned this ad before i went on a handbrake rampage round asda's carpark

  • lennon #10 5 years ago

    "The Advertising Standards Authority determined that the implication of the advertisment was likely to cause serious or widespread offence."

    37 people its hardly a lot is it.

  • souljacker2000 #11 5 years ago

    thank you for pointing this out. From now on my 1's will become ones. Ill make an effort just for you Kangarootoo...

    I wish it was the 80's

    Jayce and the wheeled Warriors
    Mysterious cities of gold..
    thundercats.

  • IAmBatman #12 5 years ago

    der tolle emil - The Burnout 2 thing was Acclaim offered to pay any speeding tickets you got on the way to buy the game on the day of release.

  • kangarootoo #13 5 years ago

    @souljacker2000

    Yay \o/


    ...secretly I wish it was the 80s too. If it was, I would totally allow you to use 1s instead of ones. I'm dead generous like that.

  • Nomgle #14 5 years ago

    "37 complaints were received"

    "the implication of the advertisment was likely to cause serious or widespread offence"

    Erm, so either it caused widespread offence, or it only offended 37 people in the entire country.

    Which is it ?

  • aldo_14 #15 5 years ago


    I wish it was the 80's

    Jayce and the wheeled Warriors
    Mysterious cities of gold..
    thundercats.

    Trapdoor?

  • kangarootoo #16 5 years ago

    @Nomgle

    Complaint numbers are representative. Not everyone actually puts pen to paper.

    For example, OFTEL (who manage TV ads and so on) reckon that for every complaint that they actually receive, 600 people were offended but didn't bother to contact them. not sure what the numbers may be like here, but its reasonable to assume the same logic applies.

  • souljacker2000 #17 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    Cheers much appreciated.. if you ever wana use 1s.. just come n ask me

    @aldo_14

    shit completely forgot... how could i
    /slaps wrists

  • kangarootoo #18 5 years ago

    @aldo_14

    [link url=http://www.hotukdeals.com/forums/showt hread.php?t=77073&highlight=trapdoor
    ]http://ww w.hotukdeals.com/forums/showthr...[/link]

  • Canyarion #19 5 years ago

    "Wasn't there a complaint back when Burnout 2 was released too? I remember showing a ticket for speeding gave you a small discount? I'm not sure though."

    On the day that game launched, EA refunded all your speeding tickets, basicly encouraging you to break the law.

  • lennon #20 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo - And there in lies the problem. 37 people were offended enough to complain. Fair enough.

    Many more may not have liked the advert but were not offended enough to bother to complain. So based on some crazy logic this advert gets banned. 1000's of complaints I wouldnt argue but 37 is just someone deciding its easier to get the advert banned than have to explain to 37 serial complainers why it was not.

    Been through something similar myself recently where something has been banned due to a couple of complaints!!!! Never mind asking the rest of us if we are actually bothered or agree.

  • tiddles #21 5 years ago

    EA: "This ad was a terrible misjudgement and as a result we will not be using it again now that our marketing campaign for this game is over."

  • InfiniteFury #22 5 years ago

    I would say the fact they chose not to defend it is another boring "No it's OK, we've got the publicity we wanted" from the marketing fuckwits.

  • Snooz #23 5 years ago

    Good thing Americas Army is, like, soo not real life.

  • SeesThroughAll #24 5 years ago

    Yeah, whatever.

    On the PSP, the burnout game you should be playing is Legends, anyway.

  • penhalion #25 5 years ago

    @Souljacker2000 and lennon

    The advert is offensive because we have a problem with joyriding and car thefts. If you have seen the advert you would know it effectively says vent your anger on a car. Even the image suggests the event is a passtime.

    37 complaints are taken as 37,000 offended people based on the logic that for every one complaint there will be at least a thousand other people who were offended but, too embarassed or intimidated to complain. This is how TV adverts are rated too. The base it on the fact that so many thousands will see the advert. Basically it takes a lot to get someone to actually write to the ASA. This is why each complaint is taken so seriously. They don't actually pay much attention to repeat complainers so these will be 37 unique complaints with valid reasons in the complaint.

    The online gaming community is becoming guilty of mirroring the ESRB and ASA in having seemingly knee jerk defence reations to complaints about anything game related. Yet it is our industry that has gotten itself to this stage by not self regulating.

    We should have know that any industry that isn't self regulated to a good standard is inviting the relevant government bodies to step in and regulate their asses for them!

  • MrBiggles #26 5 years ago

    Once again the gaming community show their retarded mentality, whaT a bunch of fucking morons. Good Job we've got people keeping a check on you freaks and your never ending search for killing and crashing in games.

    Retards

  • BBIAJ #27 5 years ago

    "On the day that game launched, EA refunded all your speeding tickets, basicly encouraging you to break the law."

    That's clever, seeing as Acclaim published the Burnout games back then!

  • souljacker2000 #28 5 years ago

    car theft and vandalism are dont by mindless thugs, many of them are addicts who dont play/ cant afford games..

    I believe its just a pr stunt

  • kangarootoo #29 5 years ago

    @lennon

    But I think the basis of any complaint system is to respond only to complaints, not to ignore complaints if the majority don't really care.

    When it comes to adverts, I'm not sure anyone really has strong positive feelings much of the time. Either an advert offends, or you have no particuylarly strong feeling about it. On that basis, banning based on offense seems the sensible route. I might not mind an advert, but where is the value to me to have it persist if someone else if offended by it?

    Maybe I am just very community spirited :)

  • lennon #30 5 years ago

    "Basically it takes a lot to get someone to actually write to the ASA."

    Do you really believe that? I have worked with a couple of people who would complain about anything and everything.

    I know people who have written to the military to complain about helicopters flying over there car and to BT for birds crapping on them when they walked under telephone lines. 37 people is not enough people for this sort of thing to be taken seriously.

    @ Mrbiggles - Is it still ok to use such terminology. Careful someone might write a letter of complaint!
    Edited by 1 at 27/06/07 @ 11:08

  • kangarootoo #31 5 years ago

    "On the day that game launched, EA refunded all your speeding tickets, basicly encouraging you to break the law."

    Pack of twats.


    @bigo

    Oh ffs. Its not that bloody straight forward. It never is. Why whenever this issue comes up do somepeople try and reduce it to "watching TV does not make me a murderer". No one is bloody suggesting it does!

    Every. Cocking. Time.

  • kangarootoo #32 5 years ago

    @penhalion

    Good post.


    @lennon

    "I know people who have written to the military to complain about helicopters flying over there car and to BT for birds crapping on them when they walked under telephone lines."

    Your experience is purely anecdotal.

    "37 people is not enough people for this sort of thing to be taken seriously."

    Actual proper research suggests that it is.

  • trav #33 5 years ago

    This won't affect EA in any way though, mainly as the marketing campaign for this game would of been over months ago.

    They just have to avoid it for the next Burnout.

  • kangarootoo #34 5 years ago

    "They just have to avoid it for the next Burnout"

    Actually, they could probably just do the same thing again. And by the time it gets pulled or branded "irresponsible" it will have done the job.

    I suppose I retract my original "If they didn't expect this response, someone wasn't doing their job properly." comment. They porobably did expect this, and someone WAS doing their job.

  • The-Bodybuilder #35 5 years ago

    Are some people here so blind by thier super-liberal views that they can't see how increadibly irresponsible this advert was?

    This whole "everybody is picking on us" mentality seen in the gaming community is beginning to get annoying.
    Edited by 1 at 27/06/07 @ 11:39

  • -TKF- #36 5 years ago

    GIEF LINK

  • lennon #37 5 years ago

    Anecdotal yes (I never claimed it was representative of the populace) but the point is that people will and do complain about everything whether it makes any sense or not to them or anyone else.

    Research may suggest that figure is right and I guess there is nothing I can do myself to prove its wrong but I just dont believe 37 people is enough. Is it ok to for me to challenge this research?

  • PlugMonkey #38 5 years ago

    "Are some people here so blind by thier super-liberal views that they can't see how increadibly irresponsible this advert was?

    Exactly what scale of irresponsibility are we using here? If a billboard poster that hints at vehicular violence is 'incredibly irresponsible', that doesn't leave much room on the scale for things like leaving your child alone in a bath with a toaster balanced on their head, and that kind of thing.

    Or, to put it another way, what was the actual chance of anyone really, actually being harmed as a result of this advert? I would say the answer is so close to zero as to be impossible to calculate.

    It was in poor taste, possibly. But 'incredibly irresponsible'? Pull the other one.

  • kangarootoo #39 5 years ago

    @The Bodybuilder

    "This whole "everybody is picking on us" mentality seen in the gaming community is beginning to get annoying."

    +1
    Edited by 1 at 27/06/07 @ 11:44

  • Rirekon #40 5 years ago

    To be fair to the ASA, it was a pretty stupid advert really, particularly considering the other racing-game Ad which came under fire showing cars chasing around a high street. That's the kind of thing I'd expect from a Take-Two advertising stunt.
    EA are obviously aware of how daft they'd been as they've pulled it without any fuss, for which they get a little kudos.

  • kangarootoo #41 5 years ago

    @lennon

    "Is it ok to for me to challenge this research?"

    Absolutely, in fact I demand that you do :D

    With facts mind...

  • lennon #42 5 years ago

    Well what do you make of the number of people that felt they had to complain about Celebrity Big Brother? I believe the totals was in excess of 40,000. Ok thats maybe an extreme example of complaints but it does prove that people are prepared to complain if something upsets them enough.

  • PlugMonkey #43 5 years ago

    "Well what do you make of the number of people that felt they had to complain about Celebrity Big Brother? I believe the totals was in excess of 40,000."

    So, by the complaints-to-actual-people-offended formula posted on this thread, about 40 million people in Britain find Big Brother offensive?

    Actually, that sounds about right. :)

  • lennon #44 5 years ago

    @PlugMonkey - Fair point. Hadnt thought of it like that. :)

  • kangarootoo #45 5 years ago

    @lennon

    Big brother has a bigger "installed base" than Burnout ad viewers I would think. But the same logic still applies to some degree.

    Way more than 40k people will have been offended, its just than 40k of them decided to actually complain. I think that the BB situation was widely considered as more offensive than this add, which will adjust the numbers too (though I do think there was also some bandwagon action going on in that particular BB case).

  • BBIAJ #46 5 years ago

    @Kanga:

    Did you miss my post then?

    Everyone else seems to have done...

    To reiterate, Acclaim were responsible for the Burnout speeding ticket PR stunt (remember the change your name to Turok for a year/name your baby Turok, and Shadowman gravestone controversies?), not EA. They picked up the series from Burnout 3: Takedown onwards.

  • jlaakso #47 5 years ago

    An example of advertising I wouldn't condone, but undoubtedly they knew to expect this reaction. They're getting a lot of free publicity for getting the ad banned.

  • kangarootoo #48 5 years ago

    @BBIAJ

    Yeah I did. Err, try writing bigger or something ;)

  • Arcadiian #49 5 years ago

    @Rirekon

    EA didn't pull the ad, they'd already finished using it ages ago.

    And how many people banned for speeding do you know who have blamed Burnout in court ?

    Then there's the constant crash scenes we see in movie adverts, are they all going to be banned now too ?

  • kangarootoo #50 5 years ago

    @Arcadian

    Allow me to repeat my previous post.

    --
    @bigo

    Oh ffs. Its not that bloody straight forward. It never is. Why whenever this issue comes up do somepeople try and reduce it to "watching TV does not make me a murderer". No one is bloody suggesting it does!

    Every. Cocking. Time.
    --

    Grmmle, bloody internet, etc.

  • Arcadiian #51 5 years ago

    No, it's not quite as simple as i put it, but at the same time there are people out there who do blame games for exactly that.

    The woman in the UK who blamed her sons murder on Manhunt.

    The woman in the US who blamed her sons murder on Grand Theft Auto III.

    That Jack Thompson guy who blames ... well everything, on games.

    Of course there isn't an easy answer to it all, but questions about other media need to be asked, to at least find some general consesus on what should be banned and what shouldn't. An educated review, rather than ignorant assumptions. It seems the only people who are affected by these adverts etc, are the people attempting to ban them.


  • kangarootoo #52 5 years ago

    "but at the same time there are people out there who do blame games for exactly that."

    And those people are either bonkers, or just driven by understandable grief and a need for an answer. That doesn't mean that there aren't also valid reasons for wanting a degree of censorship in some situations (such as controlling the use of, if not actually banning, the advert in question).

    "An educated review, rather than ignorant assumptions."

    It sounds like we actually agree overall to be honest.

    I hope you can see, based on my previous response to bigo's post, why I jumped on you though (aside from the fact that I'm a grumpy sod sometimes). Making "games don't make me a murderer" type comments (or context relative variants) don't quite fit into the category of educated review that we both appear to desire. :)

    Edit: JESUS, so many typos.
    Edited by 2 at 27/06/07 @ 15:12

  • ExplodingClown #53 5 years ago

    Advertising => wankiness. Game ads => general public thinking gamers are wankers. Anyone remember those desperate Battlecruiser 3000 ads with Jo Guest holding the game box over her crotch, tag line "She Really Wants It"?

    /shakes head in despair of industry ever growing up

  • kangarootoo #54 5 years ago

    I recall seeing an advert 20 feet wide on the side of a bus. Something to do with need for speed. Its tag line was an oh so amusing reference to "skid marks".

    I nearly quit my job and went to grow lettuce somewhere.

  • afghan_jones #55 5 years ago

    I only just heard about this ad and it made me want to run people over and crash my car. Thank heaven I never actually saw it, who knows what atrocities I might have committed.

  • davisorle #56 5 years ago

    Just for the fact there are so fucked up people out there that they might get influenced by videogames like Manhunt, Burnout, GTA etc we can't enjoy things like this. It's not the games and their adds they should be banning. It's those fuckin' kids that should be banned. They should lock them up somewhere. Being so easilly affected makes them sick anyways and dangerous for the rest. So all this thing is pointless.

  • ExplodingClown #57 5 years ago

    It would help if 'imbecile adolescent pricks' wasn't regarded by shameless publishers as such a high priority category for targeted marketing.

  • secombe #58 5 years ago

    Here you go...

    http://ww w.asa.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/A858E...

  • zuljin #59 5 years ago

    @ExplodingClown
    "Anyone remember those desperate Battlecruiser 3000 ads with Jo Guest holding the game box over her crotch, tag line "She Really Wants It"?"

    I do I do!!!

    What do I get?

  • Les #60 5 years ago

    "It's those fuckin' kids that should be banned. They should lock them up somewhere. Being so easilly affected makes them sick anyways and dangerous for the rest."

    Right! Next step would be to lock up the fanboys...

  • YourMessageHere #61 5 years ago

    I'm not getting this. I find most ads offensive, in that they patronise and take me for a fool, as I imagine most people do. Yet the problem is not that I'm being patronised by the ad, it's that I'm being patronised by the ASA instead. They argue that this still image condones bad driving, while no-one apparently has the slightest problem with the game itself, which is actively condoning this same behaviour by its fundamental design; that's pure hypocrisy.

    Either Burnout is by its nature somehow harmful to people, in which case, fine, ban the ads, the games, and all other games for that matter, or it's not, in which case the complainants are clearly overreacting (not to mention setting up strawman arguments) and should learn to cope with the idea that not everyone's idea of entertainment is the same as theirs, and shut the hell up.

    I also find it difficult to accept that it being judged "offensive" by 37 random people's arbitrary standards is sufficient to have it reprimanded or whatever the hell the ASA actually did, when so many adverts are equally easy to interpret in just as harmful a manner. Then again, maybe I just don't hear about other ads, since I don't frequent insurance and margarine and high street fashion websites.

    Also, how the hell are you supposed to publicise a game like this, centred as it is around relieving your stress by repeatedly causing immense traffic accidents, without doing something like this?