A complaint against a promotional activity featuring a BuzzBallz branded Gacha Machine on London’s South Bank has been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (Panel). The full decision can be found here.
The complainant was also concerned that the product being distributed as part of the promotion, BuzzBallz Berry Cherry Limeade, resembled a toy and that the flavour was appealing to under-18s. The packaging was considered separately by the Panel and was found not in breach of the Code. The full decision can be read here.
The complaint, from a member of the public, expressed concern about the Gacha Machine which was “dispensing Buzzballz-branded Labubu toys, stickers and alcohol. The large, branded machine also displayed images of emojis and cartoon characters which could be seen by under-18s.
The Panel considered both cases under Code rule 3.2(h), which states that a drink, its packaging and any promotional activity should not have a particular appeal to under-18s.
In relation to the BuzzBallz branded Gacha Machine promotional activity, the Panel considered that London’s South Bank was a popular destination for all ages, including families with children. Therefore, the Gacha Machine was clearly visible to anyone in the vicinity including under-18s even if they were not able to take part in the activity due to age verification checks for participants.
The Gacha Machine dispensed prizes which included BuzzBallz-branded Labubu style plushies, stickers and BuzzBallz Berry Cherry Limeade all of which were intended to be taken away and would be seen by a wider audience. The Gacha Machine was brightly coloured, decorated in emoji-style motifs and included large blue and white font creating a distinct eye-catching contrast. The Gacha Machine also incorporated a large depiction of a character resembling a Labubu-style toy, which the Panel noted were very popular with under-18s.
Each of these elements in isolation were considered by the Panel to have a particular appeal to under-18s. When these elements were then considered together, the Panel concluded that the overall impression had a high level of appeal that would particularly resonate with under-18s. Therefore, the Panel found the Gacha Machine promotional activity in breach of the Code and upheld the complaint.
The Panel also considered the complaint against BuzzBallz Berry Cherry Limeade. The Panel noted that while the packaging shape bore a similarity to a ball, not all balls were toys and would have broad appeal across all ages. The packaging also included a ring pull top and flat bottom base identifying it as a drinking receptacle. The Panel discussed the flavour, noting that while ‘Berry Cherry Limeade’ was predominantly a fruit flavoured drink, it had both a sweet and sour profile that was complex and could have appeal to a broad range of age groups. The Panel concluded that in the context of simple packaging, albeit with a novel design, the flavour did not contribute to an overall impression that would have a particular appeal to under-18s. Therefore, the Panel did not uphold the complaint under Code rule 3.2(h).
The Panel also considered the BuzzBallz Berry Cherry Limeade name under Code rule 3.2(f); a drink should not encourage illegal, irresponsible or immoderate consumption and Code rule 3.2(a); a drink should not give the higher alcoholic strength or intoxicating effect undue emphasis. The Panel considered the word ‘buzz’ and whether it gave either the drink’s higher alcoholic strength or intoxicating effect undue emphasis. In a decision made in 2022*, the Panel had previously found that ‘buzz’ did not suggest that consumption of the drink could provide an effect, such as a buzz, as there was nothing else on the packaging that implied this. The Panel stated in the previous case that if there was not enough to suggest that the word ‘buzz’ would provide an ‘effect’ then it could not be said that the word alone placed undue emphasis on a potential intoxicating effect. The name was therefore not found in breach of Code rule 3.2(a).
The Panel then considered whether the word ‘buzz’ encouraged irresponsible consumption. The Panel stated that while ‘buzz’ could be linked to a feeling in some circumstances, it was not enough to encourage irresponsible or immoderate consumption that would directly result in intoxication, particularly in the context where there was nothing else on the packaging which suggested this. Accordingly, the product was not found in breach of Code rule 3.2(f).
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel, Rachel Childs, said: “Producers must be cautious when developing innovative promotional events. The many elements that made up this activity all had, in their own way, a particular appeal to under-18s. This is a precedent setting case of which I would encourage all producers to take note. Age-gating an event is not enough to ensure that a promotional activity will not have a particular appeal to under-18s. Producers must be mindful of where such events are held as well as making sure the activity does not incorporate elements which have a particular appeal to under-18s, such as machines that are well-known for dispensing toys and sweets. The Panel welcomes the producer’s assurance that the Gacha Machine will not be used again in promotional activity.”
A spokesperson for Sazerac said: “Sazerac strives to adhere to ethical, moral, and legal standards with our portfolio of brands. Our promotional Gacha Machine was designed to reflect BuzzBallz’s brand’s packaging and personality – bold, fun, distinctive, and creative. BuzzBallz is an adult product, marketed exclusively to adults. In line with that, participation was strictly restricted to adults. Sazerac is committed to marketing our brands responsibly and promoting responsible consumption strictly for legal-age customers.”
* Complaint against BuzzBallz products not upheld – Dec 2022 – https://www.portmangroup.org.uk/complaint-against-buzzballz-products-not-upheld/