Company: Carlsberg–Tetley Brewing Limited
Final Decision: 18 August 1997
Considered under the 1st Edition of the Code.
“The childish cartoon/picture of a man must be against your Code as it appears to infer some strange effect is the result of consuming the product.”
Member of the public from London
Under Code paragraph 2.1(c)
Brand names and product descriptors should not be more likely to appeal to under 18s than adults through, for example, use of imagery of or allusion to under 18s culture.
Under Code paragraph 2.1(d)
Brand names and product descriptors should not encourage immoderate, illegal or irresponsible consumption such as binge drinking, drunkeness, drink driving, purchase by or sale to under 18s.
Under Code paragraph 2.1(e)
Brand names and product descriptors should not suggest an association with violent, aggressive, dangerous or anti-social imagery or behaviour.
Under Code paragraph 2.1(f)
Brand names and product descriptors should not suggest sexual success or prowess.
Under Code paragraph 3(8)
Packaging and point of sale materials should not predominantly appeal to under 18s.
The Panel noted the following dictionary definitions: for ...head‘, ‘in combination meaning fool or idiot; user of a drug; oral intercourse‘; ‘Give head‘: ‘to perform oral intercourse? The Panel also noted that there is a pop group named ‘The Lemonheads‘.
The Panel further noted from the Company‘s letters of 9th June and 8th August 1997 that the Company now no longer produced either ‘Lemonhead‘ or ‘Orangehead‘ for sale or distribution in the UK market. Nonetheless, having received this complaint, the Panel has, in accordance with its usual practice, gone on to make this final decision.
Although the complaint itself did not directly raise any specific matters under the Code, the Company had been advised that the Panel would consider the product under both sections 2 and 3. The Company had taken the opportunity to comment in its letters of 9 June 1997 and 8th August 1997.
The Panel considered that, although the name of the product is the same as that of a pop group, it does not for that reason appeal more to under 18s than to adults in breach of paragraph 2.1(c). The Panel also considered that it cannot reasonably be said that the name encourages immoderate consumption in breach of paragraph 2.1(d) or that it suggests anti social behaviour through an allusion to drug culture in contravention of paragraph 2.1(e).
However, despite the Company‘s assertion to the contrary, the Panel did consider that the strap line (gives good orange) suggests sexual prowess within the meaning of paragraph 2.1(f).
The Panel did not consider that the packaging could be said to appeal predominantly to under 18s within the meaning of paragraph 3(8).
Action by company
The product was withdrawn by the company for commercial reasons prior to the Panel’s decision.