The Walt Disney Company

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Challenger:                 Children’s Advertising Review Unit

Product Type:              Movie/Media

Issues:                         Inappropriate Content

Disposition:                 Referral to MPAA

Basis of Inquiry:

Television advertising for the film “Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides” (“Pirates”) came to CARU’s attention through its routine monitoring practices.  The commercial for “Pirates,” rated PG-13 by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) for “for intense sequences of action/adventure violence, some frightening images, sensuality and innuendo”[1] aired, among other times, on May 17, 2011 on Avatar: The Last Air Bender on NickToons at 7p.m.   This raised concerns regarding the appropriateness of advertising a film rated PG-13 to children.

CARU’s Guidelines:

The “Core Principles” section of CARU’s Guidelines states, in part,

5. Products and content inappropriate for children should not be advertised directly to them.

Additionally, section (i) of the General Guidelines, entitled “Unsafe and Inappropriate Advertising to Children,” reads, in pertinent part:

2(a) Advertisers should take care to assure that only age appropriate videos, films and interactive software are advertised to children, and if an industry rating system applies to the product, the rating label is prominently displayed.

Referral to MPAA

Pursuant to an agreement reached with the MPAA, if an advertisement for a film rated PG-13 was inadvertently placed during children’s programming, CARU will ask the advertiser to pull the ad and to make sure the placement does not reoccur. If the advertiser complies, CARU will close its inquiry.  If the placement was intentional, CARU will refer the matter to the MPAA Advertising Administration to determine whether the film is appropriate to be advertised during that time.

The Advertiser informed CARU that the commercial was intentionally placed during children’s programming.  CARU is consequently referring this matter to the MPAA for its determination whether this PG-13 film should be advertised to children.  (#5350 PBS, referred to MPAA 07/11/2011)

 

Subscribe to the Ad Law Insights or Privacy Initiatives newsletters for an exclusive monthly analysis and insider perspectives on the latest trends and case decisions in advertising law and data privacy.

 

 

 

 

Latest Decisions

Decision

National Advertising Division Refers Home Chef to Federal Trade Commission

New York, NY – January 13, 2025 – Based on Relish Labs, LLC d/b/a Home Chef’s failure to address compliance concerns from a previous inquiry, BBB National Program’s National Advertising Division has referred Home Chef to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in accordance with its procedures.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Refers “Made in USA” Claims by Larose Industries d/b/a Roseart and Cra-Z-Art to the Federal Trade Commission

New York, NY – January 10, 2025 – The National Advertising Division referred advertising claims by Larose Industries, operating under the names Roseart and Cra-Z-Art, that its products are “Made in USA” to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) after Larose Industries failed to respond to the inquiry.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends T-Mobile Discontinue or Modify 20% Savings vs. ‘The Other Big Guys’ Claim; T-Mobile to Appeal

New York, NY – January 9, 2025 – The National Advertising Division recommended that T-Mobile discontinue or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the comparative claim that consumers can “save 20% every month vs. the other big guys” if they subscribe to T-Mobile in markets where Spectrum Mobile also...

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

In National Advertising Division Fast-Track SWIFT Challenge Behr Voluntarily Discontinues “No Comparable Product” Claim

New York, NY – January 8, 2025 – In a National Advertising Division Fast-Track SWIFT challenge brought by Benjamin Moore, Behr voluntarily discontinued its “No Comparable Product” claim.

Read the Decision Summary