In its response‚ the company said the dog was not in any way harmed during the filming of the advert. The company contended that the man in the commercial does not use a large amount of force to move the dog and that the animal does not look distressed or in any pain.
It also argued that pulling a reluctant dog was not an unusual practice and that the act Kotze complained about was not a portrayal of cruelty to animals.
According to the company‚ a dog trainer was present during the filming of the commercial to ensure that the dog was not harmed or distressed. An animal welfare certification was also obtained confirming the appropriate treatment of the dog‚ the company said.
After seeking advice from the Animal Anti-Cruelty League on whether it would have approved the advert‚ the ASA dismissed Kotze’s complaint. The body found that the commercial does not appear to encourage or condone cruelty or irresponsible behaviour towards animals.