ASA publishes findings on racial and ethnic stereotyping in ads

The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has published the findings of its project which looked at the extent to which the portrayal of race or ethnicity in UK ads might give rise to harm or serious offence, including by reinforcing adverse stereotypes. While it is fortunately uncommon, we have covered the issue of racist advertising previously here and here.  However, damaging stereotyping is more nuanced and likely to be more common.

The ASA says that the findings of the project strengthen its understanding of the impact of such portrayals on people who are represented in the ads.  They also say that the report should help advertisers and agencies to avoid inadvertent harm or offence through their portrayals of race or ethnicity.

The research identified three broad potential harms that could arise from adverse portrayals of race and ethnicity:

Reinforcement of existing stereotypes

: This was often described as ‘always showing us the same way’. The repeated use of certain portrayals has the potential to reinforce how society views people from minority groups. For example, portraying certain minority racial or ethnic groups in stereotypical roles (such as shopkeepers or taxi drivers) or possessing stereotypical characteristics (depicted through behaviour, accents, hairstyles or dress).

Creating new stereotypes

: Participants suggested portrayals have emerged that can paint a one-dimensional picture of people from groups of non-White heritage, particularly around the depiction of family life and relationships (for example, participants spoke about the lack of Black families shown) and people’s appearance (Black and Asian participants felt that lighter-skinned people from their ethnic groups were more likely to feature in ads).

Perpetuating or reinforcing racist attitudes and behaviours

: Ads that depicted behaviour or other factors associated with racism, even where the advertiser was challenging negative stereotypes, were felt by participants to pose a risk of evoking past trauma related to their race or ethnicity and reinforced prejudice.

When assessing the extent to which race and ethnicity are represented in ads, participants believed advertising had become more inclusive and diverse in recent years. However, it was still felt that more could be done to improve representation and avoid types of portrayal that have the potential to cause harm or serious offence.

For example, people with non-White heritage were almost three times more likely to feel under-represented or not represented at all in ads (66%) than White respondents (23%), and around half of the participants from Black, Asian and other ethnic groups said they are not portrayed accurately.

Portrayals of minority racial and ethnic groups in ads most likely to cause offence related to the use of humour perceived to be at their expense (39%), followed by showing groups as outsiders (37%). Half of all respondents felt ads showing discrimination towards particular ethnic groups (51%) or showing ethnic groups in a degrading way (50%), had the potential to cause harm. And certain portrayals relating to group characteristics, culture, sexualisation and religion were also felt to have the potential to cause harm by creating a set of limiting beliefs about a person from a particular group.

While there were often varying perspectives on representation and portrayal across individual groups, there was widespread agreement from participants across all groups that advertising in 21st century Britain should be inclusive of different racial and ethnic groups, both in terms of portrayal and representation.

The ASA has now asked CAP and BCAP to consider its evidence with a view to producing guidance to support advertisers’ compliance with related rules around harm, offence, and social responsibility.

The image below is from a poster ad by the Commission for Racial Equality, who used it back in 1999 to encourage people to confront their own stereotypes. In the reveal, the man in the photograph was identified as a dentist. As well as the two blog posts referred to above, you may be interested in our review of racism in British advertising, as well as further afield, published to coincide with Black History Month in 2020.