Violence

Violence should only be depicted in advertising if it is justifiable.

Section 2.3 of the AANA Code of Ethics states:

Advertising shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised.

Violence includes both actual depictions of violence and suggested violence (e.g. a strong sense of menace or threat, sound effects).

In some circumstances, the portrayal of violence may be considered justified, such as in community awareness advertising or if the product being advertised contains violence (e.g. computer games or films).

Where violence is considered justified, it must not be excessive or gratuitous. If the level of violence is too high, it may not be considered justifiable even if it is relevant to the product or service being advertised.

The depiction of violence extends to the consequences of violence (e.g. depiction of an injured person not just the image of them being hurt), feelings of violation, shock and fright, and may involve:

  • depictions that condone or incite violence
  • intimidating behaviour
  • abuse
  • bullying
  • domestic violence
  • sexualised violence
  • use of weapons
  • vandalism and violence to property
  • consensual violence
  • aggressiveness
  • a person injured or in pain
  • aggressive action
  • exposing oneself to dangerous activities
  • threats
  • accidents
  • horror and gore
  • human atrocities and massacres
  • war
  • torture
  • exploitation and cruelty, including to animals.

For more detail and guidance on the portrayal of people in advertising read the AANA Code of Ethics: Practice Note.

Visit our education page to learn more or view a case study for violence here.

Examples of previous decisions
Community awareness ads

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Where the depiction of violence is not justifiable or related to what is being advertisedCancer Council Victoria – 20222022

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Ads which portray realistic and graphic situations intended to evoke a strong reaction in the community in response to an important call to action, or awareness raising, is a justifiable use of violence.SafeWork NSW – 2022
SA Ambulance Service – 2022
Transport Accident Commission –2022
Department of Social Services – 2021
Quit Tasmania – 2019
Advertising which uses confronting and graphic imagery to promote important health services are a justifiable use of violence.Cancer Council Western Australia – 2020
Channel Nine St Vincent de Paul Bushfire Appeal – 2019
Pedestrian Council of Australia Ltd – 2019
Dept Justice & Community Safety – Victoria – 2019
SA Health – 20192019
Ads which only reference violence, and do not depict it, to raise awareness about an important social issue.Amnesty International – 2020
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees – 2019
​Domestic violence

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Any malicious threat of violence towards a partner, even in a fantasy situation, is unacceptable.Betta Games – 2021
Violence is not justifiable when promoting an unrelated product or service.Uber Eats – 2021

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
An unlikely interpretation that an ad is suggestive of domestic violence.Taste My Bean – 2019
Light-hearted banter or disagreements between couples in safe and loving relationships, where the tone is not threatening or aggressive.Optus Communications – 2021
Athena – 2020
Supagas – 2020
Yum Restaurants International – 2019
Ads for literature apps or novels which include domestic violence in the storyline if advertised in a manner that is sensitive to the audience.Dreame – 2020
Entertainment

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Ads for entertainment products where violence may be justifiable, but is likely to cause undue alarm or distress to members of the community.BettaRoadshow Films – 201920192019

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Depiction of characters from video games when advertising the game is a depiction that portrayed violence that is justifiable in the context of the product being sold.Rockstar Games – 2022
Activision – 2021
Wildlife Studios – 2020
Take Two Interactive (2K Games) – 2020
Sony Interactive Entertainment – 2019
When promoting acting schools, movies, events and shows, it is reasonable for the advertiser to show violent images or scenes related to the product being promoted.Apple Pty Limited – 20222022
Sony Pictures Releasing – 202120222022
Paramount+ – 2021
The Walt Disney Company – 2021
Binge – 2021
Movie trailers which suggest violence through suspenseful and menacing tones which are relevant to the movie’s content.Universal Pictures – 202120222022
Paramount Pictures Australia – 201920222022
DreamStan – 20202020
Sony Pictures – 201920202021
Roadshow Films – 201920192019
Weaponry

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Ads which show weapons used in a threatening or violent manner when not related to the product being promoted.Club-Mate Australia – 2021

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
The use of a weapon in an ad which is unrealistic, exaggerated and humorous, and where the use of weapons is clearly fantasy and unlikely to encourage similar behaviour in real life.iSelect Pty Ltd – 2019
The depiction of a gun or other weapon in the promotion of a game, movie or show that features weapons is justifiable, if that weapon is not being depicted in an overly threatening or alarming manner.Paramount+ – 2021
Roadshow Films – 20192019
Ubisoft – 2019
Cruelty to animals

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
The depiction of people interacting with animals in a cruel or unhealthy way which could be copied.Brand Developers – 2020
Depiction of simulated animal cruelty in an ad for a gaming app.Special Gamez – 2022

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
The depiction of confronting but not violent imagery to raise awareness of animal cruelty.World Animal Protection – 2021
PETA Australia – 2021
The depiction of people interacting with animals in a realistic manner, where the animal is not seen to come to any harm is not considered cruelty to animals.ReAmped Energy – 2022
Tom Waterhouse – 2019
The depiction of animal hunting or fishing when related to legal practices.Victorian Department of Health and Human Services – 2021
Where an ad is humorous and/or unlikely to be real or taken seriously by the general community.Uber Australia Pty Ltd –2022
Specsavers – 2021
Aldi Australia – 2020
Bullying

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Any depictions or threat of violence towards a person will be seen as bullying, especially if the person on the receiving end of the actions reacts in a hurt or negative manner.AHM Health Insurance – 20202020

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Siblings interacting with each other in a playful and realistic manner will not be seen as bullying.Hyundai Motor Company – 2021
Community awareness ads depicting bullying in a negative light with anti-bullying messaging.Dolly’s Dream – 2020
Sex and violence

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
The suggestion of children being the target of sexual assault or predatory behaviour will breach this Section of the Code.Grill’d – 2021
Depictions or suggestions of sexual violence through words or images.Sax Fetish –2021
Wicked Campers – 2019

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
The depiction of someone restrained or wearing BDSM paraphernalia, may not considered to be suggestive of sexual violence where the person is depicted as confident and happy and actively participating in the situation.Honey Birdette – 2021
Crazy Maple Studios – 2021

​​​Depictions of pain

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Showing a lack of reaction to a violent event may lessen the impact of the violence and make it appear unrealistic and humorous.Enatin Group – 2021
Ultra Tune – 20202020

Suggestions of violence

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Depicting a person with the intent to physically harm another person where a high degree of malice is present, even if no actual violence depicted.App Quantum – 2021
Rollic Games – 2021
Gem Puzzle Dom – 202020202020

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Where there is no graphic imagery or no actual image of violence.Aware Super – 2020
Universal Music Australia – 2020
Other violence

Examples of ads found in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
The use of an unnecessarily high degree of menace which is not related to the product being advertised.IAG Insurance – 2020
The depiction of violence in a way that is not relevant to the product/service being advertised.Brickworks Building Products – 20222022
iSelect Pty Ltd – 2022
Raiz Invest Ltd – 2022
Kayo Sports – 20202020
The reference to or depiction of suicide without providing appropriate referral information.Sonus Complete – 2020
Wicked Campers – 2019

Examples of ads found not in breach of Section 2.3 of the Code of Ethics:

SummaryCase examples
Advertising which uses humorous or exaggerated scenes which are clearly fantastical and unlikely to be taken seriously by most members of the community.Raiz Invest Ltd – 2022
Grill’d – 2021
Frucor Suntory Australia – 2021
The Man Shake – 2020
Westpac Group – 2020
Depictions of people acting in a humorous, light-hearted manner are unlikely to be considered as being acts of violence.Reckon Limited – 2021
OPSM – 2020
Tabcorp Holdings Limited – 2019
Depicting extensive body modification through tattoos and piercings.Icon Ink – 2022
Depicting a kiss where there is no explicit consent given, but also no indication that the kiss is not consensual.Mars Wrigley Australia – 2023
Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Ltd –2022

Scroll to Top