A complaint against Aldi’s The Reprobates Sparkling Wine has been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (ICP). A complaint against The Reprobates California Red has not been upheld, the full decisions can be read here. Both complaints were made by Zenith Global Commercial Ltd, as part of the Portman Group’s independent proactive audit of the UK market[1].
The complaints against both products raised concerns under Code Rule 3.2 (b) that the name and imagery on the labels glamourised illegal or anti-social behaviour. The complaint against The Reprobates Sparkling Wine also concerned Code Rule 3.2 (i), questioning if the adult male on the label on was over the age of 25.
First, the Panel considered the name of the product range, The Reprobates, after hearing from the producer and considering the name in isolation, they concluded that on its own the name, ‘The Reprobates’, did not pose a problem.
The Panel then considered the name in relation to the imagery on both products. The Sparkling Wine included an image of a man holding a blackboard that included the name of the product and on the neck of the bottle was a label with tally marks on. Looking at all these elements in conjunction, the Panel concluded that the overall impression conveyed by the drink’s name, the mugshot style image on the label and the prison-style number tally on the bottle neck, all inferred that a serious enough crime had been committed to warrant a custodial sentence, creating the impression of an association with illegal behaviour. Accordingly, the complaint was upheld under Code rule 3.2(b). Aldi no longer sells this product.
When considering the name ‘The Reprobates’ alongside the imagery of the California Red, which included the image of a dog wearing a hoodie set against a dark background, the Panel concluded that whilst the image was dark and edgy there was nothing that inherently suggested an association with aggressive or anti-social behaviour. The tally marks were also not present on the California Red. As such the complaint was not upheld for this product.
The Panel also considered whether the label on the Sparkling Wine featured the image of a person who was, or looked as if they were, under 25 years of age. Noting that while his age was indeterminate, the historical clothing did mean he was presented in a mature manner. The Panel considered that there was nothing else on the packaging that referenced modern youth culture and further determined that the man was not presented in a way that would be particularly aspirational to under-18s. The Panel therefore did not uphold the complaint under 3.2(i).
The producer is working with the Portman Group’s Advisory Service to ensure the range is now compliant with the Code.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel, Rachel Childs, said: “We considered both of these products in the round to decide if the overall impression was one that was in breach of the Code. The decisions in both cases demonstrate how some features are acceptable in isolation but can become problematic when combined with other design elements.”
[1] Part of the independent proactive audit of the Naming and Packaging of Alcoholic Drinks Code, Sixth Edition Amended