A live-action advertisement for Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 has been banned in the United Kingdom after the country’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) determined it “trivialized sexual violence.” The ad, which aired in November 2025, featured actors portraying “Replacers” stepping in for airport security personnel while the real staff were depicted as engrossed in playing the new Call of Duty title.
Activision has frequently used comical live-action ads featuring “Replacers” in its Call of Duty: Black Ops franchise marketing campaigns. These ads typically depict individuals filling in for others at their jobs or in life so those individuals can play the latest Call of Duty game. For Black Ops 7, this concept continued with a new set of Replacer ads, including the now-banned airport security scenario starring Peter Stormare and Nikki Glaser.
The controversial ad depicts the Replacers subjecting a passenger to increasingly invasive and humiliating treatment after he is stopped at a security checkpoint. Stormare’s character informs the man he has been “randomly selected to be manhandled.” Glaser’s character then puts on a pair of blue gloves before instructing the passenger to remove all his clothing. The scene escalates with the gloved Replacer declaring, “Time for the puppet show,” followed by a post-credit scene where a metal detector is placed in the passenger’s mouth and he is told to “bite down” as the gloved Replacer prepares to proceed “going in dry.” The ad remains available for viewing on YouTube.
Initially, the ad was approved for broadcast in the UK with an “Ex-Kid” timing restriction. This classification meant it could not be aired during or around programming specifically designed for children under the age of 16, but it was deemed acceptable for adult audiences. The rationale behind the initial approval was that the scenario was “deliberately implausible, parodic,” and bore no resemblance to actual airport security procedures.
However, on , the ASA announced its decision to ban the advertisement following the receipt of nine complaints. Complainants argued that the ad trivialized sexual violence. After a thorough review, the ASA ruled that while most viewers would likely recognize the ad as humorous, the humor itself was derived from “the humiliation and implied threat of painful, non-consensual penetration,” an act explicitly “associated with sexual violence.”
The ASA’s ruling stated, “Because the ad alluded to non-consensual penetration, and framed it as an entertaining scenario, we considered that the ad trivialised sexual violence and was therefore irresponsible and offensive.” As a consequence, the ad must be modified to remove the elements deemed to trivialize sexual violence before it can be shown again in the UK. The ASA also directed Activision Blizzard to ensure that future advertisements are “socially responsible and did not cause serious offence, for example by trivialising sexual violence.”
Activision Blizzard responded to the ASA’s investigation by asserting that the advertisement was intended for a mature video game audience – specifically, those aged 18 and over – and that this demographic would have a higher tolerance for “irreverent or exaggerated humour.” The company also argued that the ad contained no explicit implication that the depicted acts were sexual in nature and did not sexualize the act of performing security searches.
The ASA ultimately rejected Activision’s arguments. The regulator found that the ad’s humor relied on depicting a scenario that, despite its exaggerated presentation, referenced acts associated with sexual violence. This framing, the ASA concluded, was irresponsible and offensive, regardless of the intended audience or the context of a video game advertisement.
This ruling highlights the increasing scrutiny faced by advertisers, particularly in the gaming industry, regarding the portrayal of potentially sensitive or harmful content. While humor and exaggeration are common marketing tactics, the ASA’s decision underscores the importance of considering the potential impact of such depictions and avoiding the trivialization of serious issues like sexual violence. The case also demonstrates the ASA’s willingness to uphold standards of social responsibility even when advertisements are targeted towards adult audiences.
The incident raises questions about the boundaries of acceptable humor in advertising and the responsibility of companies to ensure their marketing materials do not contribute to the normalization of harmful behaviors. It remains to be seen how Activision Blizzard will respond to the ruling and whether it will lead to changes in its advertising strategies for future Call of Duty releases.
