Should I be offended by Demi Lavato’s banned advertisement?

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has ruled that a poster by Demi Lovato promoting her latest album would ‘cause serious offence to Christians’. The poster, seen in multiple sites across London in August, featured an image of the album cover showing Lovato bound in a bondage-style outfit while lying on a large, cushioned crucifix.

The ASA ruled that the use of what was basically a sexual swear word in an untargeted medium and public place where children were also likely to see it, ‘was likely to result in serious and widespread offence’.

The ASA also determined that although it might be argued the image was being presented as artwork, the image of Ms Lovato on a mattress shaped like a crucifix, in a position with her legs bound to one side in a way that was reminiscent of Christ on the cross, together with the album title was ‘likely to be viewed as linking sexuality to the sacred symbol of the crucifixion’, and so ‘was likely to cause serious offence to Christians’.

To their credit, at least the ASA has demonstrated some degree of recognising the possibility of offending Christians, and for this, we must be grateful. In general, I am not especially noticing much restraint in sexual or otherwise blasphemous content in advertising, entertainment or the media so we should be thankful for this ban.

There is also a sense of the curious position of Christians, that something like this has to be pretty bad and in the wrong place for it to reach the threshold and yet a few words used against another religion or interest group provokes much more public outrage and fury.

Am I offended?

Well, I wasn’t, but that was mainly because I hadn’t noticed the posters until seeing this story in the press. But yes it is unpleasant and upsetting to have what is a crucial part of the Christian gospel mocked in this way. It is insulting for a commercial artist to indulge in cultural appropriation of the central symbols of Christianity and use them to promote a decidedly non-Christian message and ideology.

While I believe we should care about trashing the cross, I find this more bleak than offensive. This blasphemy is a symptom of a much wider and deeper disregard and disdain for the God I love and the Saviour who gave his life on that cross for me.

I am deeply saddened at the sexualised irreverent culture in which we live which despite the occasional setback continues the march towards nothing being sacred and of lasting value. 

But maybe, just maybe, we can use this piece of art to point to the real offence – the difficult-to-hear message that we need the Saviour who was actually bound to a wooden cross so much more than we need an entertainer.