A controversial billboard featuring a blood-stained sanitary pad has sparked a national conversation in Malta but the debate has quickly moved beyond menstruation itself to a broader question: what should, and shouldn’t, be displayed in public spaces.
The advertisement, created by a private company and placed on Maltese roads, uses shock marketing to draw attention to menstrual products. While some have praised it as a bold step toward dismantling stigma around periods, others argue that the issue is not menstruation, but the explicit nature of the imagery in a shared public environment.
The controversy gained traction after Sue Caruana shared the image on social media, describing the advert as “awful” and questioning the need for such explicit visuals. Caruana stressed that while menstruation is natural, not everything needs to be publicly displayed to sell a product, especially in spaces encountered daily by people of all ages.
On the other side of the debate, Clayton Mercieca, Head of the Human Rights Directorate, acknowledged that the campaign was clearly designed to provoke shock and discussion. However, he argued that it should be viewed in the wider context of long-standing efforts to normalise menstruation and eliminate stigma.
Mercieca noted that for decades, menstrual products were advertised using blue liquid — a deliberate choice meant to sanitise and distance the reality of menstruation from public view. Recent international campaigns, he said, have shifted toward using the real colour of blood, with studies suggesting this approach helps people who menstruate better relate to their lived experience and reduces stigma.
However, the Maltese reaction highlights a deeper tension: is normalisation best achieved through confrontation, or through gradual cultural change? Critics argue that public billboards — unlike opt-in digital platforms — are unavoidable, and that shock imagery in such spaces raises legitimate concerns about consent, audience appropriateness, and advertising standards.
Supporters counter that discomfort is precisely the point, and that challenging long-held taboos requires visibility, even when it provokes backlash.
As comments continue to flood social media, the debate shows no sign of slowing. Whether seen as progressive or excessive, the billboard has succeeded in one respect: forcing Malta to confront not just how it talks about periods, but how far advertisers should go when using shock tactics in shared public spaces.
What do you think of this billboard?
Photo credit: TVM News