MEDIA RELEASE
16 November 2007
More Companies Pull Advertising from Californication After 2nd Episode
Two more companies have responded to the concerns of Family First NZ and other concerned family groups and parents by
withdrawing any future advertising from TV3’s offensive and pornographic Californication series.
“Both Subway and Castrol have withdrawn their advertising following another highly offensive episode of Californication
last night,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “This follows on from the six other companies and
a government department withdrawing their advertising following the first episode. They were Burger King, CRC, Finish
Dishwashing Liquid, Cadbury, Flight Centre, Ferrit and the Ministry of Economic Development.”
Family First is calling on other companies who advertised during the first 2 episodes to also withdraw future
advertising from the programme. They include Bond and Bond, Supercheap Autos, Mitre 10, Nissan, Mintshot, Bivouac
Outdoor, Moccona Coffee, Genesis Energy, Vodafone, Tui, Business Mentors and Monteiths.
The latest episode featured explicit sex scenes, constant explicit sexual talk and innuendo, was littered with foul
language including 19 uses of the 'F' word, the young daughter calling her father an a**hole and boasting about having a
shirt that says "Jesus is a C Word", drug use, and an underage girl sexually touching the lead character.
“Sadly and perhaps ironically, the police who advertised during the first episode and who are dealing with some of the
increase in sexual crime, offensive language and behaviour and drug crimes promoted and normalised by this type of
programme have said they are unwilling to remove their advertising,” says Mr McCoskrie.
“Despite this, the campaign against Californication has been an outstanding success because we have found that companies
have understood that by advertising during programmes that are offensive and harmful to the good of society, they are
indirectly supporting it with their advertising dollar. Many of them seem unaware of just how objectionable some of
these programmes are, and when made aware, do not want to be associated with it.”
“We congratulate these businesses for taking a pro-family stance, and encourage other businesses to be proactive in
determining what programmes their advertising is associated with.”
“It has proven that companies can help pressure television networks to clean up their act.”
ENDS