The ASAI and the Eircom broadband advert

pete

http://www.asai.ie/newsletter/detail.tmpl?SKU=20030630162009

"... the campaign had generated an exceptionally large number of complaints"

"... quoting a price for a product which cannot achieve those speeds is in contravention of this Code requirement"

"... no reference to a download cap was likely to mislead consumers"

"... reference to an inescapable cost to the consumer of a substantial connection fee should have been mentioned"

"... the radio commercial addressed to business customers stated “we’ve reduced the price by 50%” without any reference to a new product offer and the Committee considered that in that instance it was likely to mislead."

"They were disappointed that the advertisers had not taken this advice on board."

sceptre

From Eircom's reponse to the BB advert complaints:

e) 1 million broadband lines are being installed by eircom throughout Ireland (completion due by end 2003) - on average 1 line per household. It is on this basis that they claimed that they are bringing broadband to homes all over Ireland. However each line must be tested for suitability as the technology which underpins their broadband service is based on distance from the relevant telephone exchange.

Eircom in "totally twisting the truth to mislead the ASAI" shocker.

"On average 1 line per household"
May (or may not) be factually correct technically, certainly intended to mislead in reality when it's a response to a complaint about "We're bringing Broadband to all over the country"

I'm splitting this from the "Is it fair to call it 'Flat Rate'" thread as it's a different thing entirely (though I accept it does tie in with advertising of products)

qwertyup

Is there any mention in their response to indicate that the quality of the copper can cause the product to be unavailable.

From that it looks as if they are trying to make out that if people fail, its down to distance, which they cannot change. Whereas in many cases its got to be the copper.

Anyone up for mailing ASAI complaining that Eircom should be forced to say how many lines specifically can take broadband? Shouldnt be hard to get the figures from their databases if they were arsed.

I think it would make for more interesting reading than 1 million lines enabled.

BoneCollector

Although i am happy to see them take note off all the complaints..

As happenend when we previously send complaints to them, I am unsure as to what exactly the consequences where for ercom??

Where they fined!?
or did they just get a slap on the wrist!? as like the last time!?
Does the aisa have any teeth or has it lost its dentures along time ago??

SkepticOne

According to their website under the Enforcement and Sanctions section:

Publication of Case Reports, including names of advertisers and agencies involved, is an important element of the self-regulatory system. An advertisement or sales promotion which breaks the rules must be withdrawn or amended and media will refuse to publish an advertisment which fails to conform with Code requirements.

A member who does not accept ASAI decisions may be disciplined by the Board and may be subject to penalties including fines and/or suspension of membership. These penalties are rarely invoked; there is a strong commitment to the self-regulatory system throughout the advertising business and ASAI adjudications are invariably accepted and implemented.

I doubt if Eircom are worried about anything in the first paragraph. They are not a company exactly known for their sense of shame.

Since they obey the ASAI on their rulings, they would not be fined or suspended. I imagine they know in advance a lot of their ads will have complaints against them but know that they will have 6 weeks or a month before a ruling is made.

pete

http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/0630/asai.html

only 36 complaints made....

Regarding sanctions - just take a look at how many times Ryanair have been slated by the ASAI to see what effect having an ASAI complaint upheld has on a company's activities.

sceptre

Originally posted by pete
only 36 complaints made....

If you get the time, read the ASAI annual report for last year. 36 complaints is actually quite a lot.

Last year they had a total of 283 complaints for the whole year (made in relation to 116 adverts) for all adverts made by all companies on Irish TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, Internet and direct marketing. The year before the figures were 220 and 125.

This means that if this was last year (obviously it isn't:D), the complaints about this one advert from Eircom would account for a highly disproportionate 13% of their total number of complaints about all adverts for the year

In other words, there may be a great number of people who complain about adverts but only a small number of Victor Meldrew types who complain to the ASAI about them. And Eircom are seen as one of the chief culprits in the lying and misleading through advertising business, partly because they are (the figures easily vindicate this view).

(I must admit to being a proud Meldrew, though only 4 of last years 283 were mine. 3 out of 4 were totally upheld. I don't care about "offensive" adverts, I'm only concerned with the liars. An online complaint takes about 2 minutes to type and send on the ASAI site)

2002 Annual Report (204k download)

pete

Originally posted by sceptre
Last year they had a total of 283 complaints for the whole year (made in relation to 116 adverts) for all adverts made by all companies on Irish TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, Internet and direct marketing. The year before the figures were 220 and 125.

hmm i wonder how many individual advertising campaigns there are / what %age of campaigns attract complaints...

(My personal favourite ASAI moment was in the last bulletin:

A television commercial for Heineken was the subject of an objection. The commercial shows a young man dipping his arm into a vat of ice searching for a bottle of Heineken. His arm appeared red and he was shivering. He eventually got a bottle of Heineken and stood with other men who also have red arms and were shivering. The complainant was concerned that the commercial could lead to people imitating the action shown in the commercial possibly leading to frostbite and even gangrene.

no... actually my favourite is the Danone Actimel complaint, also from the last bulletin:

One complainant said that the advertising could be read as claiming that the product is supposed to change Winter (howling gales, cold etc.), to cheerful chirpy Spring in an instant and in doing so it gives a misleading impression as to the power of the substance which is only a pro-biotic with limited capability to perhaps reduce tendency towards gastro- intestinal infection.

Comedy gold.

Dustaz

Other recent upheld complaints were the Carlsberg Builders ad (sexist) and the Jason MacAteer World Cup Dream ad for Carlsberg (Robbie Keane appears in it and he is under 23, illegal for a beer ad).



Psst.... A lot of the complaints are made by advertising agencies complaining about rivals ads (after all, they know what contravenes and what doesnt).





Gotta love eircom cornering the market tho

pete

What's wrong with being sexy?

(and with that, the thread was 100% off topic)

shabbyroad

...it's such a fine line between clever and stupid....


the ASAI is akin to the Better Business Bureau in the USA.... a complete waste of time.
the police policing the police....

raeGten

Originally posted by sceptre
An online complaint takes about 2 minutes to type and send on the ASAI site)

2002 Annual Report (204k download)

Okay, I've sent a complaint in for Esat and UTVip for refering to their offerings as flat rate. The online form is great. I wish I'd known about it before.
Even if the ASAI don't have much power it's nice to know that you can have some input on the lies and exagerations that are force fed to you everyday by the media (and Eircom!).

BoneCollector

Publication of Case Reports, including names of advertisers and agencies involved, is an important element of the self-regulatory system. An advertisement or sales promotion which breaks the rules must be withdrawn or amended and media will refuse to publish an advertisment which fails to conform with Code requirements.

But essentialy once they have withdrawn or amended the adevert they avoid any penalties.;... thus they are free to make a new advert with the same lies only to amend or with draw once they have been caught again???

So whats the point!?