Do you think the promotional posters featuring David Beckham were inappropriate because of his racy tattoo?

SAINSBURY’S has apologised for sending publicity posters of David Beckham with a provocative tattoo of Posh Spice to 47,000 schools and community groups.
Outraged nursery staff complained to the supermarket, saying the semi-naked image of his wife was inappropriate for their children — aged two to four.
Pictures of Becks’ tattoo of Victoria in lingerie on his arm appeared on promotional posters and collection boxes for the Sainsbury’s Active Kids scheme.
Anita Deacon, of Winshill Pre-School in Burton, Staffordshire, said: “We’re not being prudish.
“We just think it’s inappropriate. The tattoo depicts Posh Spice wearing nothing but underwear and posing provocatively.”
And pre-school manager Lynn Baker said: “I can see it’s not really appropriate to have on show in front of children.
“We are going to keep the material in the pre-school but make sure it’s too high up for the children to see.”
Mark Jackson, customer manager at Sainsbury’s, told school staff: “I’m sorry our recent material, which is endorsed by David Beckham, shows his tattoo of Victoria clearly semi-naked.
“I understand your disappointment, especially as this is being used in pre-schools.
“I’d like to reassure you that it’s never our intention to cause offence to any of our customers and this has surely been an oversight on the part of our marketing team.”
Sainsbury’s said the material had been sent to 47,000 schools and community groups across Britain
The pictures appear on posters promoting a scheme providing schools with sports equipment in exchange for vouchers.
A spokesman added: “As a world-class athlete and father of four, David Beckham is the perfect ambassador for several of Sainsbury’s initiatives which encourage all kids to lead healthier and more active lifestyles.
“It is never our intention to cause offence and we would like to apologise if this is the case.
Top Opinion
-
gwts 2012/04/06 11:53:53No
More polls by NYCbrit
- Red_Horse 2012/04/07 03:54:23
- scum1 2012/04/07 03:32:07No+1come on! topless chicks are not a big deal in the UK so why is this tat?reply
- lucythetooth 2012/04/07 01:00:51No+1Ooooh... a woman in her underwear. Oh the horror.reply
- Wayne TH G 333 2012/04/06 15:38:12No+1Who would even notice let alone care and what's he supposed to do saw his arm off?reply
- john 2012/04/06 12:29:10
- Andy Fletcher 2012/04/06 12:26:33Undecided+1I think they are making the proverbial mountain out of a mole hill. It's a tattoo and kids the age they are concerned about might notice the tat, but they aren't going to be looking at that close.reply
- Andy 2012/04/06 12:09:03No+2Not the best idea... but, not the worst either.reply
- hari 2012/04/06 11:58:14Yes+1yesreply
- gwts 2012/04/06 11:53:53No+3if that was the worst kids had to see the world would be paradisereply





















