
Subscribe & Follow
Advertise your job vacancies
Jobs
- Traffic Manager (Junior to Mid) Johannesburg
- Experienced Talent Booker (Agent) Cape Town
- Midweight Copywriter Cape Town
- Music Profiler Durban
- Junior Designer (DTP) Durban
- Junior Copywriter and Proofreader Cape Town
- New Business Development Manager Johannesburg
- Personal Assistant Cape Town
- Group Account Director Sandton
- AM Field Sales Executive Cape Town
Pineapple's ‘caveman’ ad found offensive by advertising board
The Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) has upheld a consumer complaint against Pineapple Tech (Pty) Ltd, ruling that the company's billboard advertisement was discriminatory and offensive.
The ARB found that the ad, which featured wording reminiscent of signs held by street beggars, trivialised poverty and perpetuated harmful stereotypes. As a result, Pineapple Tech has been instructed to withdraw the advertisement in its current form.

The complaint was lodged by a consumer who interpreted the ad as a play on the cardboard signs held by homeless individuals at traffic lights. The complainant argued that the advertisement was insensitive, stating that: ˑThis is not humour. To me, it shows a company out of touch with the lived reality of millions of South Africans. Playing on poverty, desperation and unemployment to sell insurance is highly problematic, to me. It does nothing to foster a culture of humanity and tolerance so desperately needed, not only in South Africa, but in the world right now."
Pineapple Tech defended the ad, claiming that the creative concept was not linked to homelessness or poverty but was instead meant to be a humorous reference to a "caveman" character, illustrating the simplicity of their insurance services. The company denied that the ad was insensitive and argued that the complainant's interpretation was subjective.
However, after reviewing the advertisement under Clause 3.4 (Unacceptable Advertising: Discrimination) and Clause 1.1 (Offensive Advertising) of the Code of Advertising Practice, the ARB found that the ad undermined the intelligence of a marginalised group and perpetuated stereotypes.
The use of the phrase "not a tsotsi" was particularly concerning to the ARB, as it was widely understood to reference street beggars rather than a caveman figure, as the advertiser claimed. The ARB determined that the ad’s wording demeaned and exploited the struggles of homeless individuals, making it both discriminatory and offensive.
In its final ruling, the ARB concluded that the advertisement violated ethical advertising standards and instructed members not to accept the ad in its current form.

About Karabo Ledwaba
Karabo Ledwaba is a Marketing and Media Editor at Bizcommunity and award-winning journalist. Before joining the publication she worked at Sowetan as a content producer and reporter. She was also responsible for the leadership page at SMag, Sowetan's lifestyle magazine. Contact her at karabo@bizcommunity.com