Ads watchdog raps JD Sports over claims of ‘dangerous’ motorbike campaign
JD Sports Fashion, the Bury-based athleisurewear retailer, has been censured by advertising watchdog, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) over a campaign that some thought encouraged dangerous driving.
The complaints involved a Facebook page, a Facebook reel, a paid-for Facebook post, and a poster for JD Sports and its range of Nike Air Max clothing.
Advert (a) was a cover photo of the JD Sports Facebook page, posted on 4 March 2024, featuring three images in a row. One image showed three stationary motorcycle riders wearing Nike Air Max clothing. Another showed a rider performing a wheelie on a motorcycle. A third showed a close-up of a Nike Air Max shoe that a rider was wearing while their foot rested on a motorcycle peg.
Advert (b) was a Facebook reel, posted on 4 March 2024, featuring shots of motorcycle and quad bike riders driving in an urban environment, while drifting and performing wheelies. The ad rapidly cut between shots of the driving and close-ups of the Nike Air Max clothing and shoes that the riders were wearing, including showing the shoes moving along the ground while the riders were driving. Superimposed text on the reel and in its caption stated, “*STUNTS PERFORMED BY PROFESSIONALS – DO NOT TRY AT HOME”.
Advert (c) was a paid-for Facebook ad, seen on 9 March 2024, showing a close-up of a Nike Air Max trainer that a rider had placed on their motorcycle’s peg.
And advert (d) was a poster, seen on 12 March 2024, featuring images of motorcycle and quad bike riders performing wheelies while wearing Nike Air Max clothing and shoes.
The ASA received 60 complaints, including from the British Motorcyclists Federation.
Some of the complainants challenged whether ads (a), (b) and (d) included illegal and irresponsible road usage.
Some challenged whether the ads were irresponsible as they depicted motorcycle and quad bike riders wearing trainers and athletic wear rather than protective equipment.
JD Sports said the motorbikes were incidental, rather than central, to the ads, and explained that the imagery used was captured either within a warehouse space leased exclusively for the purpose of producing the ads, or on a closed road.
It said it did not consider the ads depicted activities that broke the Highway Code, and that the focus of all the ads was on the clothing and footwear. It said it was unlikely any viewer of the ad would consider it a real-life representation, due to the superimposed warning text.
JD Sports also said the products advertised were not marketed as Personal Protective Equipment and explained that, beyond a helmet, there was no legal obligation for motorcyclists to wear additional protective equipment.
The ASA said ads (a), (b) and (d) featured imagery of stationary and moving motorcycles and quad bikes, and included shots of their riders using them to perform stunts, such as wheelies and drifts. Ad (b) also included shots of a rider’s foot off a motorbike or quad bike peg and bouncing along the ground as the vehicle moved. It acknowledged ad (b) stated “STUNTS PERFORMED BY PROFESSIONALS – DO NOT TRY AT HOME” throughout the ad.
However, it considered the manoeuvres depicted in ads (a), (b) and (d) would be unsafe and irresponsible if emulated on a public highway, and that the inclusion of warning text in ad (b) was insufficient to guard against the potential for the actions to be emulated.
The ads suggested that the manoeuvres were acceptable for a public road, which was where they seemed to take place. The ASA concluded that in doing so the ads condoned unsafe or irresponsible driving. On that point, ads (a), (b) and (d) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.3 (Social responsibility) and 19.2 (Motoring).
The ASA ruled that ads (a), (b) and (d) must not appear again in the form complained of. And it told JD Sports Fashion plc to ensure that future advertising did not condone or encourage unsafe driving practices.
