How pizza brand marketing reveals changing religious attitudes in Modern Zealand

Controversial ad shows society a mirror. Maybe unite us in laughter or indignation, spark debates that shape our beliefs – and sometimes reveal them political differences.

But where are the lines of what is acceptable or offensive? Earlier this year, the Modern Zealand Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) announced most complaints about ads whenever.

The categories ranged from political advocacy to household items. And the most complaints were about the place called “Hell Pizza”Condom of desire“mailers. Brand”Buns from hell“Billboard came in third.

This is not surprising, considering that the brand is often in headlines for provocative campaigns. Controversy is clearly part of the marketing strategy.

Although the numerous complaints may suggest a widespread social criticism, our research wanted to find out how the relationship between religious beliefs and advertising standards is changing: what offends Modern Zealanders, what crosses the line, and when does an ad cross the line into “acceptable” controversy?

Religious Offense vs. Artistic Freedom

Of the 79 ASA rulings from 2005 to 2021 involving Hell Pizza, only six were upheld in full and two in part. This suggests that while Hell’s ads generate forceful public reactions, most ads comply with established guidelines.

About 40% of the judgments concerned complaints with religious objections, but none of the complaints were upheld on religious grounds.

Complainants often identified as Christians or said they were commenting on behalf of a religious audience. They described Hell’s ads variously as “nothing brief of emotional and spiritual abuse,” “grossly offensive,” “disgusting,” “tasteless,” “discriminatory and insensitive,” and “blasphemous.”

The ASA acknowledged that Hell’s adverts naturally weave religious puns and references into their narrative because humour is part of the company’s brand. However, it ruled that they “fall within the bounds of acceptable humour and satire in a tolerant society”.

“Buns from hell” the billboards have attracted 178 complaints. The inclusion of a pentagram has been described as “extremely offensive” and the utilize of the satanic symbol in conjunction with the ad copy has been called “blasphemous” – particularly in the run-up to Easter.

The ASA responded that it was a “satirical play on widely recognisable religious imagery, which helped it stay within the bounds of artistic freedom”. The complaints were not upheld.

Hell Pizza Restaurant’s Easter Theme for 2014 billboard covered with rabbit skin (promoting its “rabbit pizza”) also received complaints for being disrespectful towards religious groups and vegans.

While the ASA acknowledged the billboard could upset children, it said it was “unlikely to cause solemn and widespread outrage among most people” because rabbits are considered pests and the skins came from a local meat processor. The complaints were not upheld.

Crossing the line

The ASA upheld complaints about eight Hell Pizza adverts dating from 2005 to 2021, mostly those that focused on profanity, graphic violence, racism or sexual themes rather than religion.

“New Zealand’s most hated campaign in history“It was Hell’s 2006 “Lust” campaign, where the company delivered condoms to 170,000 homes to promote its Lust pizza.

The outrage was mainly about the possibility of children being exposed to an unwanted condom supply. The ASA said that despite some benefits of the sheltered sex message, the campaign was “likely to offend many communities”. The complaints were upheld.

While religion was the primary reason for complaints about Hell’s Ads, those that were upheld were not based on religious grounds.

In fact, the pizza franchise’s “religious identity” was often cited by the ASA as a reason why controversial ads did not breach advertising standards. That means people should expect Hell Pizza’s campaigns to be gloomy, bold and shocking.

While brands often straddle the line between provocative humour and potential offence, the ASA rulings indicate a shift towards supporting artistic freedom – even when religious themes are at stake, and particularly for brands with forceful, established identities.

Changing trends and boundaries

This change reflects changes in Modern Zealand society: a decline in the number of people identifying as Christiansan increasing number of people identify as agnostic or non-religious, and those who identify as religious belong to a more diverse range of faiths.

Hell Pizza has successfully tapped into this cultural trend, pushing boundaries that might previously have sparked even greater outrage.

The brand has also mastered the art of attracting attention and gaining media coverage, which would be impossible using only time-honored paid advertising techniques.

By sparking public debate, drawing complaints and making headlines, the brand has built an identity that thrives on negative reactions, using them to enhance visibility and discussion.

How this strategy will work for social problems in an increasingly polarized world remains to be seen. But the latest “Go to hell Greta“billboards in Stockholm and its blood derivatives”meat sauce“And”Pay after life”offers suggest the company will continue to push boundaries.

Comparing religious grievances with grievances about other social issues and what this tells us about changing moral and ethical attitudes will be the subject of our next research project.