The alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel has upheld complaints against two products identified by Zenith Global Commercial Ltd, as part of the Portman Group’s independent proactive audit of the UK market[1].
The complaints made were against Northern Monk’s Amy Hastings DDH Hazy IPA and Origin Wine Stellenbosch’s Fuzzy Duck Chardonnay.
Amy Hastings DDH Hazy IPA
The Panel found that Amy Hastings DDH Hazy IPA was in breach of Code Rule 3.2(h) whereby a drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
The Panel considered the product’s design and considered representations from the producer, which stated that its intention was to create a design that celebrated femininity in the craft beer industry. Whilst the Panel acknowledged the intention to create a feminine beer label in a sector that often predominately used masculine artwork it considered in this case that the combination of the image of tattooed dogs, doodles, personified sun and moon, the pale pastel pink, alongside the handwritten signed name meant that the overall impression conveyed was very similar to a diary or notebook of a teenager. The Panel concluded that on that basis, while unintended, the cumulative impact of the design would have a particular appeal to under-18s.
The company has informed the Panel that the product is no longer in circulation and will make future changes in line with the Panel’s decision. The full decision can be read here.
Fuzzy Duck Chardonnay
The Panel found Fuzzy Duck Chardonnay to be in breach of two Code Rules. The first, 3.2(f) whereby a drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way encourage illegal, irresponsible or immoderate consumption, such as drink-driving, binge-drinking or drunkenness. The second, 3.2(h) a drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Under 3.2 (f) the Panel considered, that in the context of an alcoholic drink, ‘Fuzzy Duck’ the drinking game was sufficiently well known and that most consumers would recognise the link between the drink’s name and the game. The Panel expressed concern that any reference to a drinking game in alcohol marketing was unacceptable because of the strong association with intoxication and drunkenness. On that basis, the Panel concluded that the packaging encouraged irresponsible consumption, and the complaint was upheld.
Under 3.2(h) the Panel took all elements of the product’s label and packaging into account and concluded that the inclusion of a large-eyed, smiling, rubber duck, which would be recognised by younger children as a bathtime toy meant that the packaging would have a particular appeal to under-18s. The Panel sought to remind producers that the inclusion of any children’s toy on packaging would be unacceptable under the Code regardless of the overall impression conveyed by the packaging. Accordingly, the Panel also found the product in breach of Code rule 3.2(h).
Upon receiving notification of the complaint, the UK importer, Tesco Stores Ltd, has informed the Portman Group that the product will no longer be imported into the UK. The full decision can be read here.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel, Rachel Childs, said: “Whilst in these cases, it seems that these producers did not intend to appeal to under-18s, they underline why it is vital that producers consult the Code of Practice and whenever possible use the Portman Group’s free Advisory Service when designing their labels and packaging to ensure they do not cross the line of acceptability. Any reference to a recognised drinking game is likely to be unacceptable under the code.”
[1] Part of the independent proactive audit of the Naming and Packaging of Alcoholic Drinks Code, Sixth Edition Amended