Description:
The advertisement talked about Canada’s ‘pro-death culture’ and stated that Canada’s “politicians are “PETRIFIED to speak out on abortion because they’re afraid they will lose their grip on power”, and if they [the politicians] “don’t support it, they will be outcasts in their elite society circles”. The ad also included an image of the Grim Reaper holding a scythe, standing in a dark field with the backdrop of an overcast cloudy sky and posed the question, “HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH OF CANADA’S PRO-DEATH CULTURE? YES!”. There was a button to, “Learn more” next to the advertiser’s name/url, presumably linking to the advertiser’s website.
Complaint:
The complainant alleged the advertisement was deeply troubling, inappropriate and played upon fears to mislead the public.
Response:
In its response to Council, the advertiser asserted that the advertisement is truthful, fair, and accurate noting that while the term “pro-death culture” and the accompanying image of a Grim Reaper are both symbolic metaphors, they are not misleading, and reflect a judgment grounded in documented facts about abortion law, medical practice, and euthanasia expansion in Canada.
The advertiser maintained that politicians consistently avoid substantive debate on abortion for fear of political cost and that Canada’s public policy environment supports ‘pro-death culture’ as there is no legal restrictions on abortion at any stage of pregnancy in Canada, a global anomaly, the advertiser states.
According to the advertiser, Canada’s Parliament has repeatedly expanded access to euthanasia (MAiD), now encompassing not only the terminally ill but also the disabled, the mentally ill, and even “mature minors”, realities that it argues demonstrate Canada has normalized a culture where state-sanctioned death is accepted and facilitated as a solution to human vulnerability.
Decision:
When advocacy advertising is considered under the Code, Council is instructed not to evaluate the advertising based on their personal views of the subject. The Code does not prohibit or restrict any particular position or argument, provided that in communicating its message the ad complies with the standards of truthful, fair, and accurate advertising that does not contain unacceptable depictions or portrayals as prescribed under the Code.
Council appreciated the advertiser’s response, and considered the complaint together with the advertiser’s submission.
During its discussions, Council members agreed that the advertisement used very strong language and imagery to evoke emotion in communicating its messaging.
A majority of Council members found use of such deliberate messaging in the ad was excessive and amounted to an unacceptable depiction or portrayal that disparaged one or more identifiable group and also played upon the fears of consumers in order to mislead them. Use of the combined elements, specifically, the pro-death culture references, the suggestion that politicians are PETRIFIED [all caps] that they will lose their grip on power, and the imagery of the Grim Reaper holding a scythe, implied that politicians are like Grim Reapers actively killing unborn fetuses. This, “goes far beyond what is acceptable under the Code”, according to one Council member.
A minority of Council members found that while the advertisement used language and imagery to evoke emotion, that was not a concern because most ads do. One Council member noted, “I don’t have an issue with pro-death culture. Death is a part of life and we need to be able to talk about it and explore the topic. I’m not concerned or fearful.” In fact, this minority believed the ad did not play upon the fears of its viewers, but rather appeared to be accusatory that politicians and other supporters of Canada’s pro-death culture are in favour of killing people, not just fetuses, but everyone. These pro-death accusations, to a majority of Council members who understood the references to pro-death culture to include anyone who participates in end-of-life, not only politicians, indeed played upon fears to mislead the consumer. In addition, by using the term “loosing grip”, the ad suggests politicians are delusional and not fit to do their job.
Council held, by majority vote, that the advertisement demeaned, denigrated or disparaged one or more identifiable persons, group of persons, or professions, etc., bringing it or them into public contempt, and that the ad played upon fears to mislead the consumer, as provided under the Code.
Infraction:
Clause 11, Clause 14(c), Clause 14(d)
