The guidelines ask advertisers not to link skin colour with any particular class, community, race, religion, ethnicity or profession.
Those in the know say this is the first time ASCI has attempted to go beyond its traditional role of monitoring ads, as fairness creams, the market for which is estimated at about Rs 3,000 crore, have often been blamed for promoting the notion that fair is beautiful.
| RULE BOOK |
|
Shweta Purandare, secretary-general of ASCI, says, "A section of society felt ads pertaining to fairness products derided people with dark skin. Therefore, there was a need to provide guidelines so that both creators and evaluators of such ads were clear on what would be considered deriding skin colour."
A Hindustan Unilever spokesperson said, "We welcome ASCI's move to further strengthen the guidelines. This will help promote transparency in advertising in this segment."
A Garnier (part of the Löreal Group) spokesperson said, "We strongly believe advertising should not encourage social discrimination of people based on aspects such as skin colour. All Garnier communication focuses on the efficacy of products and is, importantly, backed by scientific facts. Our conviction is there is no single model for beauty; the appearance and physical features of each person is unique. We are dedicated to understanding and serving those differences with the diversity of our products."
Mohan Goenka, director, Emami, said, "We are evaluating the draft guidelines. As responsible corporate citizens, we do not believe in promotion of social discrimination and racism."
While experts have welcomed the move, some say it is unfair to target fairness creams alone. "Stereotypes exist in all product categories. Almost all content we consume has some stereotype or the other. Is it right to target fairness creams?" asks K V Sridhar, chief creative officer of digital agency SapientNitro. Earlier, Sridhar worked with Lowe Lintas, which made advertisements for Hindustan Unilever's Fair & Lovely brand.
"Advertising comes from observation and consumer insight. It is rooted in reality. Therefore, to come up with guidelines pertaining to advertising of these products would be incorrect. At best, you can influence social norms; I don't think you can change these," he says.
Privately, advertisers admit the matter is being furiously debated in industry circles. A senior executive at a personal care company says, "The draft guidelines have opened a Pandora's box. Let see where it goes."
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)