Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Unfair dismissal in South Africa: What the law says, and where things go wrong

June 5, 2026

High Court rules Bitcoin is both money and capital under SA’s exchange control laws

June 5, 2026

Authorities fail to overturn ruling linked to cyclist’s fall into hidden 6.2-metre culvert

June 5, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Unfair dismissal in South Africa: What the law says, and where things go wrong
  • High Court rules Bitcoin is both money and capital under SA’s exchange control laws
  • Authorities fail to overturn ruling linked to cyclist’s fall into hidden 6.2-metre culvert
  • Municipality cannot reopen a case settled by a binding plea and sanction agreement
  • FSCA imposes R5.39 million in penalties on financial services firms
  • Wits student wins leave to appeal refusal to renew 2026 registration
  • Africa Day celebrations and the enduring gendered contradictions of African unity
  • Businesses urged to make only provable advertising claims
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Teazers billboard advertisement banned for openly portraying CEOs as sexually entitled
Regulatory Law

Teazers billboard advertisement banned for openly portraying CEOs as sexually entitled

Watchdog sides with complainant who said advert damaged the image of business leadership.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliNovember 29, 2025No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
The Teazers billboard featuring a suited man styled as a CEO surrounded by women under the slogan “the CEO’s second boardroom,” which the Advertising Regulatory Board ruled was offensive and ordered to be removed.
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • A complaint argued the billboard portrayed CEOs as morally irresponsible and undermined trust in corporate leadership.
  • The ARB found the billboard promoted negative stereotypes, objectified women and linked power with sexual entitlement, setting a damaging precedent.
  • Teazers must remove the advert within two weeks, with the ruling highlighting the broader impact on public values and business reputation.

A Teazers billboard that depicted a suited executive figure surrounded by women has been banned after the Advertising Regulatory Board found that it sent a damaging message about business leadership in South Africa. The complaint focused on what the image suggested about power, authority and ethics in corporate culture.

The complainant told the regulator the image was “offensive, highly suggestive” and said it sent “the wrong message about CEOs.” She said it appeared to be “promoting infidelity” and “giving the message that this is how CEOs behave.” In her submission, she linked her concern directly to the moral crisis facing leadership in the country, stating, “In a society where fraud, corruption is rife, this is a further nail in that coffin.”

ARB draws a line around leadership and sex

In ruling on the matter, the Advertising Regulatory Board rejected the idea that the billboard was merely aspirational imagery. It accepted that adult entertainment is legal in South Africa, but said that legality does not excuse harmful symbolism.

The Directorate stated that advertising “should contain nothing that is likely to cause serious or widespread or sectoral offence,” and made it clear that this case involved more than personal offence. It explained that context matters, including “the medium, likely audience, the nature of the product or service, prevailing standards, degree of social concern, and public interest.”

Addressing the deeper implications of the image, the rule was unequivocal. “There should be no association between professional stature and sex, or between power and the likelihood of attracting (or coercing) women,” the Directorate said.

It went further, stating plainly that “women cannot be depicted as a benefit or prop of wealth or power, as this is clear objectification,” and concluded that “this is exactly what the Advertisement is depicting.” On that basis, the ARB ruled the advert unlawful under Clause 1 of the Code, which protects dignity and public values.

Teazers denies wrongdoing

Teazers argued that the billboard did not depict nudity, exploitation or explicit content and rejected the idea that it made any statement about leadership. The company defended the image as symbolic and aspirational rather than literal.

“Viewed objectively, the advertisement is not likely to cause serious or widespread offence and therefore does not breach Clause 1 of the Code,” the company said in its response. It insisted that the billboard did not portray men or women in a degrading manner, adding that there was “no suggestion of inequality, ridicule, or stereotyping directed towards any gender or profession.”

The company also pushed back strongly against the allegation that it promoted infidelity, stating that “there is nothing in the visual composition or the message presented” that supports that interpretation. “Interpreting the imagery as endorsing infidelity requires a subjective moral assumption that falls outside the reasonable-person standard,” Teazers argued.

Why the defence failed

The Advertising Regulatory Board was not persuaded. It agreed that adult entertainment advertising is lawful, but emphasised that it cannot be shielded from ethical scrutiny.

The Directorate stated that while some members of the public may find adult entertainment uncomfortable, that alone is not grounds for a ruling. However, it drew a sharp distinction between services that are legal and symbolism that is harmful.

Referring to previous rulings, the ARB reiterated that adult businesses “are entitled to advertise them, within the parameters of the Code of Advertising Practice.” In this case, the problem was not the business being advertised, but how power was portrayed.

The Directorate also placed the billboard within a broader global context, referring explicitly to high-profile abuse cases involving elite figures. It observed that wealth and power have increasingly been associated with exploitation, citing concerns stemming from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and similar cases involving influential figures.

Against that background, the ruling held that the billboard carried “implications of sexual harassment, which should certainly not be depicted as desirable in any context.”

Removal ordered

Teazers has been instructed to remove the billboard within two weeks. The order applies specifically to “the Advertisement featuring a CEO surrounded by women, stating ‘the CEO’s second boardroom.’”

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

advertising law ARB corporate ethics Gender dignity Leadership image Outdoor advertising
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

FSCA imposes R5.39 million in penalties on financial services firms

June 5, 2026

Businesses urged to make only provable advertising claims

June 4, 2026

Matric results publication stays public after High Court dismisses appeal by Information Regulator

June 4, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 8   +   4   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024

Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

June 2, 2025
Don't Miss
Employment and Labour Law Series
7 Mins Read

Unfair dismissal in South Africa: What the law says, and where things go wrong

By Ann-Suhet MarxJune 5, 20267 Mins Read

Unfair dismissal is one of the most common workplace disputes in South Africa. Understanding the rules can help both employees and employers avoid costly mistakes.

High Court rules Bitcoin is both money and capital under SA’s exchange control laws

June 5, 2026

Authorities fail to overturn ruling linked to cyclist’s fall into hidden 6.2-metre culvert

June 5, 2026

Municipality cannot reopen a case settled by a binding plea and sanction agreement

June 5, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
OUR PICKS

Agricultural advisors declared scientists in landmark Labour Court ruling

February 17, 2026

R13,914 debt triggers sale of R380 000 home, transfer halted amid execution flaws

April 20, 2026

Understanding employee rights, workplace protections and grievance resolution in South Africa

June 8, 2025
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
►
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
►
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
►
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
►
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
►
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by