The ad, created for Twentieth Century Fox's 'Minority Report', was sent as a voice message to mobile phones. It started with a man drawing breath as he states slowly "Where's my minority report?" and breathing heavily before he screams "Do I even have one?". He then breathes heavily again, before stating "Do I have one?". A girl's voice states: "No."
The voice was that of Tom Cruise who starred in the film, based on a Philip K Dick short story, and was promoting 'Minority Report' on DVD and video. Although the voice ad did end with a voiceover making clear it was promoting the DVD and video, complainants argued that it was unclear they were getting an ad.
Set in 2054, Cruise plays a police officer working in Washington DC in a division known as "pre-crime" that arrests killers before they commit the crimes. The department uses three precognitive individuals to see the future.
The system works fine until Cruise's own character is named as "perpetrator" and the "precogs" predict that he will kill a man he does not know in less than 36 hours. The title 'Minority Report' refers to one of the precogs filing a report at odds with the other two. Complete agreement is needed before an arrest can be made.
The watchdog rapped the ad for being offensive and said it was likely to cause undue fear and distress. People also complained that it was unclear that they had had to pay to hear the ad by downloading it from their voicemail service.
Fox argued that the campaign reflected the futuristic, innovative and personalised marketing methods shown in the film and was only sent to those consumers who had registered their details on the movie's website. In the film, ads are personalised and tailored to every individual.
Fox maintained it was targeting people who were likely to have either seen or heard about the film and who would be familiar with Tom Cruise's voice.
The ASA watchdog said that consumers would not necessarily immediately recognise the voice as being Cruise's and considered that the message was likely to be seen as menacing and to cause serious or widespread offence and undue fear or distress.
The authority told the advertisers not to use a similar approach again and advised them to consult the Committee of Advertising Practice copy advice team before sending more advertisements to mobile phones.
Although it noted the message made clear at its end that it was an advertisement, the authority thought that that should have been made clearer earlier and told Fox to ensure future, similar ads made clearer that the message was an ad.
On the last point that consumers had to pay a charge for getting the ad, the ASA advised the advertisers to make clear when consumers were asked to give their contact details that a cost could be incurred to receive the requested information.
If you have an opinion on this or any other issue raised on Brand Republic, join the debate in the .