Friends aren't always who they appear to be

Several consumers were surprised one morning when they received an airmail envelope, inside of which was a letter that appeared to come from an Italian teenager who had sent a hand written note and a clipping from a glossy magazine. The consumers’ surprise soon turned into annoyance when they realized that they had received a direct mailing advertising the Playstation Formula One 2001 World Championship game.

The letter, which stated it was from “Gian-franco Luis, Milan”, went into detail about how he believed the recipients could set record breaking times on the new game and urged them to post their times on a website. The glossy magazine page went in to detail about the Formula One driver Jenson Button and how he was inviting Playstation 2 owners from across the world to play the game and again encouraged people to post their times on the Playstation Formula One 2001 website.

The complainants contacted the Advertising Standards Authority objecting that the mailing misleadingly implied the letter had been sent from a teenager in Italy. One complainant also objected that her personal details had been used by the advertisers. The Advertising Standards Authority launched a formal investigation.

In response to the ASA the advertisers asserted that the concept behind their mailing was to convey the brand identity of Playstation 2, which transported people to, “The Third Place”. The letter from abroad was meant to signify that players of Formula One 2001 had a fan club and that by playing the game they too could be like a famous F1 driver.

Although the advertiser said the mailing would not be used again the ASA was concerned that the mailing had been made to look like personal correspondence sent by a child. It was deemed misleading and the ASA told the advertisers to avoid using that approach in the future. It did accept, however, that the advertiser had taken appropriate steps to offer an ‘opt out’ option to consumers who did not wish to receive further marketing communications. Therefore the advertiser was at liberty to use the complainants’ personal details for marketing purposes.