A recent ruling articulated the ASA's position on the need to give sufficient prominence to talk time conditions for pay monthly contracts. In this Insight, we explore what made those conditions significant and why their presentation was problematic, as well as advising how to ensure compliance with the Code.

A fundamental requirement of the Advertising Codes is that ads must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner. For the purposes of the Code, ‘material information’ is information that consumers need to make an informed decision in relation to a product. The Codes also require marcoms to state significant limitations and qualifications. The presentation of those qualifications must not contradict the claims they qualify.

In a recent ruling, the ASA Council applied these rules in relation to the display of talk time conditions for pay monthly phone contracts. They upheld complaints that the ad was misleading, because it did not make clear that every call would use up a minimum of one minute credit, even if the call lasted for a shorter duration. Insight explores the reasons why.

The ad listed various pay monthly plans on a website. Each plan stated a number of inclusive minutes and included a link titled “Plan Details”, which linked to a pop up box that appeared on the same screen as the pay monthly plans and included details of the talk time conditions.

Call data showed that a significant percentage of calls lasted less than one minute in duration, but was debited as one minute of call time. As such, consumers would not necessarily receive the total number of inclusive minutes stated in the headline claim. Council considered that detail to be material information, which needed to be made sufficiently clear to consumers.

Council decided the presentation of this significant talk time condition in the “Plan Details” link did not give sufficient prominence to that condition given the headline claim implied consumers were entitled to the total duration of inclusive minutes stated.

Finally, Council considered a talk time condition that made clear that consumers may not necessarily receive the total call time stated in the headline claim contradicted the impression created by that headline claim.

How do you make sure your advertising complies with the ruling?

Although not tested by the ASA, a claim that makes clear that the contract includes “Up to x minutes” of call time and which makes clear that calls will use a minimum of one minute of credit is likely to be acceptable under the Code. For assistance with similar claims, marketers are advised to contact the CAP Copy Advice team.

---

More on

• Mailings, email, phone/fax and messaging

---