Here’s some news that might just achieve something that was previously thought impossible – news that might wipe the smile of Eve Cameron’s face.

Becuase once again TV’s Worst Adverts has been vindicated by the ASA for the scorn it  poured  on the Olay advert featuring beauty journalist Eve Cameron.

As the Guardian reports:

[A] doctor challenged whether there really was scientific evidence that pentapeptides reduced lines and wrinkles. The doctor also argued that the ad misleadingly implied that the scientific community supported the paper presented at the WCD.

And goes on:

[T]he ASA upheld the doctor’s two complaints. An expert asked by the ASA to look at the claims made by the Olay ad said there were “methodological gaps in the management of results and interpretation of data presented in the published paper [by P&G]“.

And the ASA concluded:

We concluded that P&G had not provided evidence sufficient to support the claim [that pentapeptides do crazy shit to your haggard old face to make you look young again].

Sadly the ASA did not discuss my concerns that Olay were cloning beauty experts in their labs but focused mainly on banning the Olay advert for its lies.

Oh well, a win’s a win.

Gary Rhodes is on a mission.

A mission to see if taking the bucketful of dirty cash from Flora makes up for sobbing himself to sleep every night since selling his spiky haired soul to a margarine company?

No, not really, Silly.

He’s on a mission to see which is better: Flora Buttery or a euphemistically named “leading spreadable from a butter brand” (or Lurpak Lighter Spreadable as the small print simultaneously tells us).

And there’s only one way to find out which is better… FIGHT!

Oh no, that’s a different programme.

It turns out the only way to actually find out which *is* better is to travel round the shopping centres of this once great country in a bright yellow VW Camper Van with a giant, half-eaten crumpet on the roof.

A feat that is so undignified that he may as well have strapped himself to the bonnet naked from the waist down, covered his buttocks with lashing of Flora Buttery and screamed “FLORA BUTTERY MAKES YOUR BUNS TASTIER” at passers-by as he’s slowly driven round the Coventry ring road.

Ironically kissing good bye to his last ounce of self-respect with his own ring, as he goes.

And amazingly there’s worse news yet for Gary; after doing all the terribly derogatory stuff in the shopping centres it turns out that the survey produced results that would make a cosmetics company hang its head in shame.

48% of the 200 people Gary Rhodes could bring himself to ask chose Flora Buttery. That’s a whopping 96 people.

Only 45% chose Lurpak Lighter Spreadable. That’s a minuscule 90 people.

The small print on screen also has the decency to tell us that 7% had no preference. These 14 heroes of our time are the only glimpse of sanity in this ridiculous “6 people prefer our spread” fiasco of an advert by simply stating that they had no preference as to what they spread on their crumpets before cramming them down their offence hole.

I imagine that Lurpak are devastated by these findings and I really can’t see a way for them to find a way back into the spreadables – or “butterique”, as I like to call it – market after that result.

I. Really. Can’t.

Or as I mean to say: 3% variance on such a small sample actually means “Sweet Fanny Adams”.

Spread that one on your crumpet Flora.

Judge for yourself.

UPDATE

As Robert says in his comment below, the ASA has banned this advert in it’s current form. They’ve concluded that :

We concluded that the claim “More people prefer the taste of Flora Buttery” had not been supported with sufficiently robust evidence and was therefore, likely to mislead.

Most shockingly of all, this whole affair has revealed a more sinister and worrying un-truth: it wasn’t Gary Rhodes who did the survey after all – it was a “third-party research organisation”! And I thought Gary really cared about whether we preferred Flora Buttery or Lurpak but it turns out he was just pretending all along.

Shame on you, Gary Rhodes! Shame on you!

This is probably the worst use of a survey to support a claim that I’ve ever seen on a cosmetics advert.

The Claim: Rimmel’s Volume Booster Lip Gloss gives a “Lip plumping sensation” and gives you “Sexy and voluptuous lips“.

The Statistics: 47% of 34 women agreed.

Not only is a survey of 34 women completely useless (was it of 34 women that were in the office that day?) but not even 50% of the women asked agreed with the statement!

Magical.

Judge for yourself.

Did you know that if we all switch to Lenor Concentrate instead of using horrible old bulky Lenor, err, Unconcentrated we could take up to 14,000 lorries off the road each year?

Yep, you’ve guessed it, it’s another bloody “You’re destroying the environment, you bastards!” advert.

Because, you see, the bottles used in Lenor Concentrate are littler… so you get more on a lorry… so you don’t need so many lorries… so we wont kill the planet… so our kiddies can live in peace and harmony with polar bears forever.

Ooh, hang on, what’s this article in the paper I’m reading?

“Fuel duty rise…”

yada yada yada…

“Cost of motoring up…”

yada yada yada…

Ohh, here we go: “Hauliers particularly badly hit”.

Now I wonder, is it a coincidence that the cost of transporting goods around this fair isle is rising dramatically (yeah, thanks China, buying all our oil…) just as Lenor try to make us to buy a smaller bottle “to take lorries off the road”?

No, I don’t think it is.

Of course taking those lorries off the roads could have a positive impact on the environment, I don’t know (as this will shock you but “I’m not an expert”), but it will definitely save Lenor money.

So why make us feel bad by lying to us?

Here’s my advice, just stop making the big one Lenor and save us from the guilt.

I was thinking twice whether to blog this because it’s a bit *old hat* but they insist on still showing the damned adverts, so here it is.

Sometimes adverts are for stuff that you need, sometimes they are for stuff that you want and sometimes they are for stuff that no-one wants and they definitely don’t need. Activia from Danone falls into the last category.

Before I go any further I’ll hold my hands up here. I’m not a scientist. I’ve got a GSCE in it but that doesn’t make me a gastroenterologist. I’m fairly certain though that when it comes to discomfort downstairs, men and women aren’t that different. There have been studies that show we’ve got different brains (although the results aren’t as conclusive as some). Hormonal differences? I can dig that, Sister. But discomfort downstairs? I don’t think so, Homes.

So when I see the Activia advert that tells me that “digestive discomfort affects 56% of women” and that by eating “Bifidus ActiRegularis®” (that’s the new name for “Bifidus Made-up-ium”…) at least once a day, I’m thinking “I know a cheaper way to solve that”.

Even though “82% of people with digestive discomfort said they felt better after eating Activia®” I confident that I can beat it.

In fact I’m sure I’m not the first one to think up the solution, but here it is: farting. The advert should go:

“Digestive discomfort affects 56% of women. So for the love of God, do a fart!”.

I know from having spoken to, ooh, at least 5 women in my life that most women (at least 56.5% of them) live in a fantasy land in which they don’t actually have the ability to do farts. But women, cards on the table, you can do farts, can’t you? And I say go for it. It’s very, very satisfying and it relieves digestive discomfort 100% of the time or your money back.

Judge for yourself.