London's skies have been graced by the distinctive blue Goodyear blimp this month, marking its first return in four years as part of a European tour. The 75-metre airship quickly became a social media sensation, with its journey over the capital becoming one of the most tracked flights globally on some online platforms. Many Londoners were seen pointing their phones skyward, capturing images of the iconic dirigible as it traversed the cityscape.
However, the blimp's highly visible presence has brought to light a significant gap in UK advertising regulations. While Britain has had a ban on aerial advertisements since 1960 under the Civil Aviation Act, airships are one of the few exceptions. This means that although the flight itself required clearance from air traffic controllers, the giant advertisement emblazoned on its side did not need approval from any council or advertising watchdog.
Professor Jonathan Hardy, professor of communications and media at University of the Arts London, has expressed concerns over this regulatory void. He suggests that while a novel experience for many, unchecked corporate sky advertising could lead to scenarios akin to those depicted in dystopian films. Hardy advocates for clear rules, a straightforward path for consumer complaints, and effective regulation, none of which he believes are currently in place for such aerial displays.
Goodyear, a tyre and rubber company, celebrated the 100th anniversary of its first branded airship flight last year. The company describes the blimp as an 'analogue' piece of marketing perfectly suited for today's digital social platforms, generating a level of publicity that traditional advertising campaigns simply cannot achieve. Nicola Green, Goodyear's lead for communications in northern Europe, noted that the blimp managed to divert conversations from the weather to itself, highlighting its unique impact.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has clarified that the blimp likely falls outside its jurisdiction. It views the branding on Goodyear's own aircraft as 'point of sale' advertising, similar to a sign in a shop window, and therefore beyond the scope of its advertising codes. This interpretation has been labelled 'ironic' by critics, who argue that a massive, floating advertisement is as far from a point of sale as possible, underscoring the complexities and perceived loopholes in the current regulatory framework.