The anti-choice group "We Need a Law" has contracted with
Pattison Outdoor Advertising to display these billboards in
numerous cities/locations across Canada - despite the fact
that Pattison has an Advertising Policy that says ads must not
contravene the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards. Most
anti-choice ads DO in fact violate the Code, and this one is
likely no exception. Unfortunately, Pattison still approved
and ran the ad, and company president Randy Otto insists they
won't take down the ad unless/until Ad Standards issues a
decision against the ad. Perhaps a deluge of consumer
complaints will help them change their minds!
Please complain to Pattison and ask them to remove the
billboard ads. Personal reasons why you find the ad offensive
and how it affected you are best (or use points below). Email:
Please also complain to Ad Standards (see procedure below). If desired, you
can use or adapt the points below:
On its face, the ad statement that “Canada has no abortion laws” is accurate. However, that is not enough. It’s about the implication the ad makes and what's missing. Section 1 of the Advertising Code, "Accuracy and Clarity", is broadly worded to disallow representations that may be perceived by the audience in a misleading way, i.e., the general impression conveyed by the advertisement is key. Ads must also not omit relevant information that results in a deceptive or misleading ad.
The perceived misleading messages the ad sends are that abortion is completely unregulated, there's something wrong with abortion, and there should be laws restricting abortion. Further, the ad omits to say that abortion is in fact regulated by the Canada Health Act, the Canadian Medical Association, the provincial Colleges of Physicians & Surgeons, medical discretion, best practices, and clinical protocols. Just like any other healthcare. In fact, no healthcare treatment has criminal or civil laws governing it, as that is unnecessary, including for abortion.
Also, the ad may contravene Section 14 of the Advertising Code (Unacceptable Depictions and Portrayals) because abortion is a fundamental right for women, protected by Charter rights of bodily security, life, liberty, conscience, privacy, and equality. The advertiser "We Need a Law" advocates for laws restricting abortion, which means they advocate for removing women's human rights. Under Section 14, this would be condoning discrimination, as well as demeaning or degrading to women. The same applies to transgender people who can get pregnant, as they are protected under anti-discrimination laws.
The anti-choice groups "Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical
Reform" (CCBR) and "Show the Truth" have been active in
numerous cities this summer displaying their graphic imagery
of alleged aborted fetuses, and/or delivering graphic flyers
to households. The majority of activity has been in the metro
Toronto area, but there have been reports of activities from
Ottawa, Peterborough, Oshawa, Oakville, Pickering, Waterloo,
Burlington, Winnipeg, Regina, Calgary, Vancouver, New
Westminster, Burnaby, and other cities.
Note: Flyers from from CCBR usually have the phone number 289-805-8298 (which is out of service) and web link www.whyhumanrights.ca, which goes to CCBR's website www.endthekilling.ca. They also use the name "Choice42.ca" without permission - this is a different group that has distanced itself from CCBR and its tactics.
Please write to your local government (city council):
Also, please submit a complaint to Ad Standards - see
If you see an anti-choice ad that you feel is inappropriate, offensive, inaccurate, etc., you can submit a complaint to the advertising watchdog Ad Standards. This private agency administers the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards (“the Code”).
Ad Standards has limited enforcement powers beyond asking the advertiser to rescind the ad and not use it again, and some anti-choice groups refuse to honour this request. Although the Code has no authority or legal standing on its own, it is widely endorsed by advertisers, advertising agencies, and media. When ads are deemed to contravene the Code, the decisions can be effectively used to convince the ad hosts (local governments, media outlets, etc.) to remove the ads and not accept similar ads again. Further, many cities and municipalities cite the Code in bylaws and advertising policies, which gives the Code further authority and strength.
You can submit your complaint online or by snail mail or fax. When submitting online, the website will take you through a series of questions. We provide guidance for most of the steps as follows:
If you don’t have a photo or copy of the ad to send (see next field), describe the ad in detail here.
Alternatively, provide a link to a copy of the ad online. Sometimes a media story will show it or the anti-choice group responsible will have it on their website. Make certain that any linked copy you provide is the same ad you saw.
See our Guide to Advertising Code below to help you, if desired. For example, you may want to cite section(s) of the Advertising Code and explain why you believe the ad contravenes them.
However, it’s fine to just describe the negative effects the ad had upon you or your loved ones, or give your own reasons why you feel the ad is inappropriate. This could even make your complaint stronger, e.g. if you had a strong emotional reaction to the ad.
If Ad Standards thinks there might be a Code infringement, they will accept your complaint for formal review by the Advertising Standards Council.
If desired, you can do a bit of research on the Code to figure out what Code sections the ad might contravene, and the previous decisions Ad Standards has made against anti-choice ads. Again, this is not necessary, feel free to submit a complaint based on your own thoughts and opinions.
Here’s the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards, complete with explanation and definitions.
For a list of decisions against anti-choice ads, visit Ad Standards’ complaint search page and enter “abortion,foetus,fetus” in the “Advertiser or other Key words” field.
Anti-choice ads are considered advocacy ads. Just by their nature, most anti-choice ads will run afoul of Section 1 of the Code, Accuracy and Clarity, which is worded quite broadly to capture not only inaccuracies but also deceptive or misleading claims, omissions, and claims unsupported by evidence.
Previous examples of inaccuracies that Ad Standards found in anti-choice ads include:
Another very important part of the Code is section 14, Unacceptable Depictions and Portrayals. Anti-choice ads are often demeaning to women and trans people, and arguably even discriminatory because they may imply they are murderers or that their Charter rights should be removed.
Section 14 has several subsections that advertisements must not contravene. (Note: The following are incomplete summaries that may also miss nuance. Please consult the full text.)
Advertisements must not:
Previous examples of Section 14 contraventions that Ad Standards found in anti-choice ads include:
Two other Code sections might be useful, depending on the ad:
The only anti-choice ad that, so far, has been found in contravention of this section was an ad saying: “This is a Child. Not a Choice. Why abortion when there are alternatives?” Ad Standards said this statement played upon women’s fears in order to mislead them about abortion.
Update: The ads were
removed by the city in April 2018 after numerous complaints.
On May 30, Ad Standards upheld a complaint about the ad, saying it was misrepresentative, scientifically inaccurate, and demeaning and disparaging to women.