The growing use and abuse of sex in French advertising prompted strong reactions from consumer and feminist associations and resulted in extensive and strict public and private controls. Recently, the French self-regulatory system developed a system involving various stakeholder organizations to analyze social trends related to the acceptability of sexually oriented advertisements, develop new voluntary guidelines, solicit complaints, and handle them through an independent jury. Subsequently, the number and proportion of controversial advertisements has significantly decreased, and French advertising practitioners have been nudged to accept greater professional responsibility in exchange for the freedom of creativity to which they aspire. A few U.S. developments parallel this increasing cooperation between the public and private controllers of the old issue of “taste and decency in advertising,” which has not faded in societal importance.
ARPP (2008), Bilan 2007: Publicité et Image de la Personne Humaine.Paris: Autorité de Régulation Professionnelle de la Publicité.
2.
ARPP (2009), Bilan 2008: Publicité et Image de la Personne Humaine.Paris: Autorité de Régulation Professionnelle de la Publicité.
3.
HowardBeales J.III (2003), “The Federal Trade Commission's Use of Unfairness Authority: Its Rise, Fall, and Resurrection,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 22(2), 192–200.
4.
BoddewynJean, J. (1989), Sexism and Decency in Advertising: Government Regulation and Industry Self-regulation in 47 Countries.New York: International Advertising Association.
5.
BoddewynJean, J. (1991), “Controlling Sex and Decency in Advertising Around the World,”Journal of Advertising, 20(4), 25–35.
6.
BoddewynJean, J. (1992), Global Perspectives on Advertising Self-Regulation: Principles and Practices in Thirty-Eight Countries.Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
7.
BravinJess (2010), “Top Court Is Next Level for Games,”Wall Street Journal, (November 1), B1.
8.
BVP (2006a), L'Image de la Personne Humaine dans la Publicité en 2006.Paris: Bureau de Vérification de la Publicité.
9.
BVP (2006b), Rapport d'Activité 2005.Paris: Bureau de Vérification de la Publicité.
10.
BVP (2007), Rapport d'Activité 2006.Paris: Bureau de Vérification de la Publicité.
11.
CapellaMichael L., HillRonald P., RappJustine M., and KeesJeremy (2010), “The Impact of Violence Against Women in Advertisements,”Journal of Advertising, 39(4), 35–49.
12.
DavidsonKirk (2003), Selling Sin: The Marketing of Socially Unacceptable Products.Westport, CT: Praeger.
13.
EdelsteinJeffrey, S. (2003), “Self-Regulation of Advertising: An Alternative to Litigation and Government Action,”IDEA: The Journal of Law and Technology, 43, 509–543.
14.
GiddensAnthony (1993), The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies.Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
15.
LaneF.S. (2006), The Decency Wars: The Campaign to Cleanse American Culture.Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
16.
LiptakAdam (2010), “Law Blocking Sale of Violent Video Games to Minors Is Debated,”The New York Times, (November 3), A16.
17.
LoubradouEsther (2004), “Du Sexe pour Capter l'Attention: Les Aspects Juridiques de l'Utilisation du Sexe dans la Publicité Française,”Mémoire de Recherche, Social Sciences University, Toulouse, France.
18.
LoubradouEsther (2011), “Porno-chic et Indécence Médiatique: Contributions Interdisciplinaires sur les Enjeux Socio-Juridiques et Communicationnels des Contenus Sexuels dans les Médias de Masse Français et Américains,” doctoral dissertation (Law and Communication), Social Science University, Toulouse.
19.
McNairBrian (1996), Mediated Sex: Pornography and Postmodern Culture.London and New York: Arnold.
20.
McNairBrian (2002), Striptease Culture, Sex, Media and the Democratisation of Desire.London and New York: Routledge.
21.
Rapport IFM (2008), Rapport sur l'Image des Femmes dans les Médias.Paris: Commission de Réflexion sur l'Image des Femmes dans les Médias.
22.
Rapport IFP (2001), Rapport du Groupe d'Experts sur l'Image des Femmes dans la Publicité.Paris: Secrétaire d'Etat aux Droits des Femmes et à la Formation Professionnelle.
23.
ReichertTom (2003), The Erotic History of Advertising.Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
24.
RichardsJef, I. (2009), “Common Fallacies in Law-Related Consumer Research,”Journal of Consumer Affairs, 43(1), 174–80.
25.
RotfeldHerbert, J. (1992), “Power and Limitations of Media Clearance Practices and Advertising Self-Regulation,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 11(1), 87–95.
26.
RotfeldHerbert, J. (2003), “Desires Versus the Reality of Self-Regulation,”Journal of Consumer Affairs, 37(2), 424–27.
27.
RotfeldHerbert J., and StaffordMarla R. (2007), “Toward a Pragmatic Understanding of the Advertising and Public Policy Literature,”Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 29(1), 67–80.
28.
RotfeldHerbert J., and TaylorCharles R. (2009), “Advertising Regulation and Self-Regulation Issues Ripped from the Headlines with (Sometimes Missed) Opportunities for Disciplined Multidisciplinary Research,”Journal of Advertising, 38(4), 5–14.
29.
TeyssierJean-Pierre (2004), Frapper sans Heurter: Quelle Éthique pour la Publicité?Paris: Armand Colin.
30.
TeyssierJean-Pierre (2011), “Advertising Regulation and Self-Regulation in France,” in Global Advertising Regulation Handbook, ShaverMary Alice, ed. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, forthcoming.
31.
TrumbullGunnar (2006), Consumer Capitalism: Politics, Product Markets, and Firm Strategy in France and Germany.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
