Heather Bellamy spoke with Don Horrocks, Head of Public Affairs at the Evangelical Alliance, about the recent Advertising Standards Authority ruling

Don Horrocks

The Evangelical Alliance's complaint about an offensive advertisement by the gambling organisation Sporting Index that was published by City AM newspaper has been upheld by the Advertising Standards Authority. The ruling found that the advertisement, in which the Christ the Redeemer statue in Brazil was digitally altered, breached three sections of the code. To find out more Heather Bellamy spoke with Don Horrocks, Head of Public Affairs at the Evangelical Alliance.

Heather: So what exactly had they done to the statue that was so offensive?

Don: The well-known statue of the figure of Christ in Rio had been digitally altered. The image was changed and caricatured to show the figure of Christ holding a bottle of booze in His right hand and His left arm was around a bikini-clad model and the caption over it read: "There's a more exciting side to Brazil".

Heather: Had there been many complaints about that advert?

Don: I don't think there had been many - there rarely are for this sort of thing - but I think the Advertising Standards Authority reckoned they'd had 20.

Heather: So what made the EA decide to get involved?

Don: Simply because, whilst we don't want to be complaining about every example of attack against the Christian faith, nevertheless we think that if we want to have free speech we've also got to have self-imposed limits and boundaries, self-restraint and some sort of respect for the values of other people, if we want to have a just society.

Heather: How did City AM or Sporting Index respond to your complaint and what you were saying?

Don: They haven't responded to us, they had to respond to the Advertising Standards Authority where we addressed our complaint. They were bemused. This is what really is interesting and what has caused us to comment, because it shows how much as a nation and a culture we've lost a sense of the sacred and the holy and also of what is offensive, because Sporting Index and City AM had no awareness as to how and why they'd caused offence. They just simply thought this was a fun caricature or cartoonish kind of thing to do, which wouldn't offend or upset anybody. That is fairly typical of our society today where, you know, I accept that offence is often taken for very small things but, on the other side, offence is often given without people understanding that things are offensive - and this was gratuitously offensive.

Heather: Do you think that lack of respect or value of religion or faith is increasing in the UK?

Don: Yeah, I think we do think that. Interestingly neither the newspaper involved nor Sporting Index have apologised. Others have been concerned about this too: the Brazilian Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican have denounced this. I think it wasn't so long ago Christianity would have been understood as without question, to be the foundation of civilised society - and the figure of Christ Himself would have been venerated quite across the board. What has tended to happen in society is that we've lost a sense of wonder; we've lost the sense of respect and of fear of God. After all, the scripture that comes to mind to me is: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," and that is something that seems to be very absent from our society. In fact I think it goes hand in hand with what we perceive to be marked religious illiteracy right across the spectrum in society today, particularly in government.

Heather: Although that's the case towards God, why do you think that that then translates to a lack of respect for the Christians, those that follow that faith?

Don: I think it's seen as an easy target. One of the questions that we have asked is: "Would they have done the same thing about other religious symbols and images?" They may have done, although I think it is interesting to ask the question as to whether they would have and I suspect they wouldn't have done it.

Heather: And why do you think that would be?

Don: Because, as I say, I think Christianity is seen as an easy target. Christians perhaps are seen not to complain; Christians are seen as passive; Christians are seen as non-reactive to offence given to them: they're seen as an easy target.

Heather: What were the three sections of code that were breached?

Don: The actual sections of code that the Advertising Standards Authority felt were breached related to harm and offence, so they believed that harm and offence had been given. The third one related to gambling because, although we didn't complain about this aspect specifically, the Advertising Standards Authority upheld our complaint in terms of harm and offence, but they also upheld their own breach of code in the area of gambling, because they felt that the image indicated that it was implying there was a link between gambling and sexual success, so that breached their code on the advertising of gambling.

Heather: Do you feel this ruling will help address lack of respect of religion and faith in our nation?

Don: I do actually. We've spent many years arguing with the Advertising Standards Authority with little success, because the Advertising Standards Authority have equally been banning churches who advertise things like Christ as healer. We have spent many years fighting complaints against wayside pulpits and churches putting up signs advertising healing services or advertising anything suggesting that Christ can heal people and we've banged our head against a brick wall for years over that. So it's nice to some extent to find that the Advertising Standards Authority agrees with us that there has to be a limit towards the gratuitous offence that's given to Christians everywhere.