Three TV commercials for SUVs and a dual-cab pick-up have been given the all-clear after complaints levelled against each were investigated and dismissed by the Advertising Standards Board (ASB).
Isuzu's D-MAX was the subject of a protest that the vehicle was being driven in an environmentally irresponsible manner. According to the ASB, the complaint fixed on the car being driven at inappropriate speeds through water and sand, encouraging "hoon" behaviour.
The importer and distributor, Isuzu Ute Australia, counterclaimed that the D-MAX in the TVC (TV Commercial) was being driven to the letter of the law at all times and the environment was not adversely affected by the driving. Spraying sand from the wheels was practically unavoidable, IUA stated in its response, and the passage of the vehicle while fording a stream with a rocky bed was less likely to cause any sort of erosion than the natural flow of the water.
In its determination, the ASB "noted that some people may consider that environmental damage can be caused by any incursions by people in vehicles into wild/environmental areas." However the ASB was clearly not convinced that was the case in this instance, and dismissed the complaint/s.
A TVC for Honda's CR-V drew the ire of one or more complainants because it featured the CR-V being reversed in an allegedly unsafe way. According to the complaint, the driver of the car is relying solely on the reversing camera, rather than turning her head and physically checking behind, along the car's line of travel. Honda's response acknowledged that the CR-V's owner manuals do discourage drivers from relying exclusively on the camera while reversing.
But the importer also explained in its response that the edited footage in the TVC showed the driver using the reversing camera in accordance with Honda's own guidelines. Furthermore, the footage was only a brief sequence in what was clearly a longer manoeuvre – during which the driver might have/could have turned around to watch out the rear window. Honda's objection to showing the full reversing manoeuvre revolved around time constraints for the TVC. Finally, Honda also noted that reversing cameras have actually reduced the incidence of parking accidents and trauma due to reversing over the past 10 years.
The ASB determined that there was nothing in the TVC to indicate the driver was totally reliant on the reversing camera to check surroundings at the rear of the CR-V, while reversing. Showing safety features in operation is not promoting unsafe driving practices, in and of itself, the ASB observed.
In a variation on the same theme, the third of the three cases concerned the Mazda CX-9 and its blind spot monitoring feature. According to the ASB the complaint focused on the driver of the vehicle failing to turn her head and check for traffic in the blind spot before commencing a lane-change manoeuvre. As with the Honda complaint, Mazda refuted that the edited footage indicated the driver was reliant on the blind-spot monitoring facility and external mirrors alone. The footage makes a transition from inside the cabin – and showing the driver checking the mirrors – to a close-up view of an external mirror, with the blind-spot alert operating. Mazda refuted that there was anything inherently unsafe shown at any point in the footage.
In its response, the importer intimated that only one complaint had been received during the period the TVC had been on air – from November 2012.
The board determined that there was nothing in the TVC to indicate the driver of the vehicle even intended to change lanes. Its assessment of the TVC led the ASB to state that it was "unclear" whether the driver intended to change lanes, but she had checked the side mirrors on hearing the audible alarm from the blind-spot monitoring system.
As for the other two cases, the ASB dismissed the complaint.