Planning On Showing Drinking And Driving (A Golf Cart)? – Advertising, Marketing & Branding

The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States Code of Responsible Practices for Beverage Alcohol
Advertising and Marketing sets forth detailed standards for how
to responsibly market distilled spirits in the U.S.

The DISCUS Code requires, for example, that marketing
“should portray beverage alcohol products and drinkers in a
responsible manner and reflect generally accepted contemporary
standards of good taste.” The Code also prohibits advertising
that shows “beverage alcohol being consumed by a person who is
engaged in, or is about to engage in, any activity that is illegal
or requires a high degree of alertness or physical coordination,
such as driving a vehicle.” The Code also prohibits
advertising that shows people who are intoxicated or that
“suggests that intoxication is socially acceptable
conduct.”

Apparently, a number of advertisers, including New Amsterdam
Pink Whitney Vodka, sponsored a Barstool Sports video called,
“Spittin Chiclets vs Fore Play – The Match We’ve All Been
Waiting for.” A consumer then complained about the video to
DISCUS, alleging that the video violated the DISCUS Code by
including the following content:

• “the individuals – public figures and part-owners of
  the Pink Whitney brand – consume and promote the product
  throughout a golf match. At least one participant becomes visibly
  and severely intoxicated, to the point of struggling to walk, speak
  coherently, or stand upright. Despite this, he is repeatedly
  encouraged by one of the owners to continue drinking Pink Whitney
  on camera”; and




• “the intoxicated individual is shown operating a golf
  cart, and at one point steps out and nearly collapses from apparent
  intoxication. Operating a motor vehicle while impaired –
  including golf cards – is a criminal offense in many of the
  jurisdictions where this product is marketed, and the video’s
  portrayal normalizes and even glorifies this behaviour.”

In response to the complaint, New Amsterdam said that it was not
aware of the existence of the video. Although the DISCUS decision
is not real clear on this point, it appears that the video was
authorized by the company, but hadn’t gone through the
company’s approval process. New Amsterdam told DISCUS that it
agreed that the video violated the DISCUS Code and explained that
the video “would not have been approved if our established
process had been followed.” New Amsterdam then worked with
Bartstool Sports to edit out the problematic portions of the
video.

In its decision, DISCUS agreed that the video violated the
DISCUS Code and commended New Amsterdam for taking swift responsive
action to fix it.

This decision highlights the importance of having established,
internal procedures for advertising review and ensuring that
company employees have been trained about not only what constitutes
acceptable content, but about what approvals are required before
advertising can be released to the public.

www.fkks.com

This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We
provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein &
Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not
be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or
omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which
they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent
clients in other jurisdictions.