Chanel's Writhing Beneath the Sheets Hottie Too Hot For Canadian TV


The Television Bureau of Canada isn't too pleased with a recent commercial from Chanel and has refused to air the ad. The spot, featuring semi-naked female perfection rolling about seductively in bed while asking her man if he loves her lips has been deemed too risque for Canadian television. The TVB says portions of the ad must be pixelated before they will approve it for broadcast. Predictablely, Chanel is balking. Chanel Canada's Public Relations Executive Director Anny Kazanjian told Marketing Daily, "When you tamper with the original product, it doesn't really leave much. Once you begin changing it, you really move light years away from what it's intended to be, and that defeats the purpose."

She does have a point. Any form of pixelation detracts from whatever is being pixelated. And, even if Chanel were to oblige TVB's Pixelation request, the ad would still be rated M and only allowed to air late night. Though the stipulation the ad run late night may make sense. While this ad is quite tame and far less graphic than many we've seen, it's the kind of ad one might be embarrassed to watch with one's ten year old son. After all, titillation and its effects aren't meant to be shared with just anyone. Yes, yes yes. We can hear the collective "eew, gross!" It was intended thank you very much.

by Steve Hall    Apr-18-07   Click to Comment   
Topic: Commercials, Policy, Racy   

Enjoy what you've read? Subscribe to Adrants Daily and receive the daily contents of this site each day along with free whitepapers.



I saw the commercial today online, and itís not very 'risquť', its actually pretty tasetful. Iím not sure whatís the TVBís problem? The small suggestion of a breast?
Thereís more violent and sexually explicit content on the CBC then this ad.

Posted by: kinga on April 18, 2007 3:42 PM

I downloaded this spot and watched it several times (er, just to be thorough, you know), and I'll be damned if I can see any good bits -- I mean, offending body parts. Banning this rather lame commercial as shot really makes no sense unless you ban thousands of other spots just as suggestive (and many of them that make a lot more sense than this one!)....

Posted by: Paul Zink on April 18, 2007 5:50 PM


Posted by: makethelogobigger on April 18, 2007 9:05 PM

"Le Mepris", by Godard, anyone?

Posted by: Frog on April 19, 2007 1:55 AM

This was the first I've seen of the commercial, but I saw the print version of this ad on the back of last weeks NY Times magazine and found it much more attention-grabbing and compelling than the commercial. I have to say the print ad stopped me in my tracks and I looked at it for quite awhile, trying to figure out why I thought it was so successful. As a woman, I felt it was reaching out to me with a strikingly old-school aspirational image that said "don't be the wife, be the mistress." The woman in the ad basically looks like some french dude's scandalously young mistress. Like, she does not look like someone's wife, or even someone's girlfriend-- she looks like a brief interlude. I thought the ad did an excellent job of emphasizing the product, this ROUGE lipstick, because it's just a still of someone in bed, obviously naked, with completely uniform skin and hair tones except for these rich and perfectly painted lips and, less of a feature, the matching nails. But the lips being so precicely painted lets you know that some thing is *about* to happen, rather than that something has happened. To me there's more suspense and story in the one picture than there is in this tiresome and nonsensical rolling around.

Posted by: Nomi on April 19, 2007 9:47 AM

So where can I buy the perfume?

Posted by: Mack on April 22, 2007 11:59 PM