An OnlyFans model’s huge raunchy billboards are under investigation by a standards regulator after 30 people – including an MP – complained.
Angry locals in north-west London have called for the removal of Eliza Rose Watson’s flashy advert.
The poster of a sweaty Eliza in a bra with her hair disheveled and a link to her OnlyFans profile and Instagram was deemed “inappropriate” by the local council and locals.
Some have even graffitied the OnlyFans ad in North Harrow – reading ‘Keep Porn Off Our Streets’.
Harrow West MP Gareth Thomas said he wrote to the Advertising Standards Authority after being told children had passed the advert on their way to school.
But Eliza – who makes £200,000 a month selling objectionable online content – hit back, saying her ad was not breaking any rules.
She’s since posted snaps of herself grinning and posing in front of her controversial billboard – all while remaining defiant about her ad choices.
The complaints were received by the Advertising Standards Authority. All said that OnlyFans portrayed adult sexual content and was not suitable for display in places where children could see it.
Some complaints have also claimed that the poster is overly sexualised and objectifies women, making it offensive, harmful and irresponsible.
However, the ASA did not accept complaints about the billboards put up in June and July this year.
In response to the complaints, Eliza told the ASA that the development process took over a month – and she made sure the ad was tailored not to be offensive to older viewers and not intriguing to the younger generation.
The selected image was evaluated by a diverse group outside the glamor industry and found to be non-suggestive, non-harmful and less provocative than mainstream lingerie or perfume brand ads.
She also provided examples of ads for clothing and condom brands that she said were running in busier areas of London.
The use of the OnlyFans logo is consistent with its appearance in mainstream media, she said.
Eliza also said that the ad deliberately omitted any explicit website link or call-to-action – which was intended to obfuscate OnlyFans’ platform from those who may not be aware or unwilling to engage.
As for the placement of the posters, she said that children’s safety was taken into account and the distance between an advertisement and a school was no more than 450 meters.
She said the ad’s content was adult-targeted and did not contain any content appealing to minors, such as bright colors, engaging slogans, fun factors, or QR codes.
The ASA ruled that the ad did not violate guidelines: “The ASA concluded that while her clothing was revealing, the image did not depict nudity and the pose taken by Ms Watson was only mildly sexual.”
“Although OnlyFans’ website contained explicit adult content, the ad contained no explicit images.
“It contained nothing that suggested an exploitative or degrading scenario or tone.
“While we acknowledged that the image of Ms Watson and the mention of OnlyFans might be off-putting to some, we concluded that the advertisement would not cause serious or widespread offense as it was not overtly sexual and did not objectify women. “
“It was likely seen by a large number of people, including children.
“However, since we felt that the ad was not overtly sexual and did not objectify women, we concluded that the ad was not likely to cause serious or widespread offense and was not placed irresponsibly.”
Eliza previously told The Sun that her haters should reconsider their criticism and take their business seriously.
She said: “This is a real deal. If a gambling or alcohol company can run their ads that are far more devastating, why can’t I?”
“If people are offended by my ad, I assume they’ll complain about the Ann Summers and Jack Daniels ads as well.
“You see ads for gambling, alcohol, sex toys, lingerie. There is no difference between this type of adult advertising and my adult advertising.”