Honda Cars India Limited - All-New Honda City - Honda Connect

Recommendation: Not Upheld | Medium: General Public

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an opportunity to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint and a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat to seek further guidance, which they did not avail but replied requesting for an extension of four weeks time to submit their detailed response. The deadlines stipulated by Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) procedure exist keeping in mind the immediate and widespread impact that advertisements have on the public. Consequently, any action which is needed to be taken with respect to the same is required to be prompt and urgent. It is for this purpose that the deadlines, as stipulated, are set for advertisers/broadcasters etc. and the CCC itself makes it a priority to deal with every complaint before it as expeditiously as possible. However, as a special gesture, the advertiser was granted an extension of additional six business days to respond. Advertiser in their response stated that “it is only depicting the safety features/services available with the car i.e. airbags, emergency calls, road assistance. An indirect indication of fast driving cannot be construed as portraying of violation of laws or violation of safety norms as no speed limit has been mentioned. Nowhere in the said commercial is it implied or directly stated that this ‘airbags’ feature is a luxury offering nor is the commercial claiming a ‘guarantee’ of safety against an accident or crash. The usage of dog animation as a character is to provide humor, serve as a strong memory element and break clutter in the digital medium which is full of contents that are considered as whacky and exaggerated humor. The dialogue ‘interspecies marriage’ was used only as part of the humor to act as recall element and was not intended to be taken seriously.” The CCC viewed the YouTube advertisement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RCcvZ7DaPU) and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the advertisement does not depict any acts that can be considered as encouraging unsafe driving. The advertisement highlights the safety features/services available with the car in case of an accident and does not portray it as a luxury feature. Further, the dog character saying “Babes zyaada fast nahin” clearly cautions his wife (human) not to speed as he is concerned about her safety. For the objection raised against the depiction of a marriage between a dog and human (interspecies marriage), the CCC felt that this was not likely to cause grave and widespread offence, though the humor may be considered in poor taste by some viewers. The dog character was used to provide humorous content for the viewers. The advertisement carried a disclaimer to mention, “The advertisement is meant for entertainment purposes only and we do not intend to hurt the sentiments of any individual, gender, class, community, sect or religion.” Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the YouTube advertisement was not objectionable and is not in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.