Free, unlimited and media-neutral
10 March 2005
One of the subjects of focus in this month’s Update is ‘cross-applicability’. CAP and BCAP are working to ensure more consistency between the non-broadcast and broadcast media whenever that is desirable. It makes sense for the codes to be interpreted in a similar way. That will help the ASA avoid making rulings that contradict one another on complaints about cross-media campaigns. For instance, the ASA non-broadcast council could uphold a complaint against a poster whereas exactly the same claim in a TV commercial in the same campaign might be considered acceptable by the ASA broadcast council. If the meaning of the codes is different or if the context of either the claim or the medium is different, that inconsistency is both right and understandable.
But, if nothing is different, we expect the same criteria of acceptability to apply to both broadcast and non-broadcast media. The new one-stop ASA shop for regulating ad content now makes desirable consistency more likely to occur. A consistent approach should benefit advertisers, media owners and consumers alike. If nothing else, it should prevent the making and screening of an expensive TV commercial that attracts complaints that the ASA then upholds, resulting in the enforced withdrawal of the commercial.
The ASA has recently aligned broadcast code policy with non-broadcast policy for two types of claim: “unlimited use” for telecoms packages and “free”, meaning “inclusive”, elements of a package. Both types of claim have prompted regular complaints to ad regulators but until now they were treated differently in broadcast and non-broadcast media.
A while ago the ASA had decided that an offer for ”unlimited off-peak Internet calls!” broke the Code. The advertiser argued that the complainant used the service in an excessive manner and that heavy, disproportionate use limited the speed and reliability of the service for others. The advertiser said it would terminate the complainant’s account if he did not reduce his usage.
Despite including the disclaimer that ”Minimum contract terms and conditions apply” in the mailing, which the advertiser believed gave it the right to cancel a user’s access without notice, especially if it deemed the use to be detrimental to others, the ASA believed the advertisement was misleading, because it promoted an “unlimited” service that could be limited or ended. The ASA asked the advertiser to consult the CAP Copy Advice team before advertising an “unlimited” service again.
Similarly, another advertiser has more recently run into difficulties after it offered “unlimited free calls any time”. The advertiser has a fair use policy that referred to a maximum number of minutes of calls a month but did not mention that in the ad. The advertiser argued that the number of minutes was not a cut-off point but was a guide to potential misuse and that it monitored excessive use of the service by customers as a means of ensuring other customers were not affected. The ASA was nevertheless concerned by a fair use policy being set against an “unlimited” offer and decided that the advertisement was misleading by not mentioning the policy. As long as the policy is truly fair and is stated in the ad, “unlimited” is likely to be acceptable. The BACC and the RACC already seem to agree that approach for broadcast media and now so, too, will the CAP Copy Advice team for non-broadcast media
The clearance centres had on the other hand been in the habit of allowing advertisers to describe as “free” part of a package, such as “free” minutes or calls, the cost of which was included in the price of the whole package – the tariff cost. The ASA has in recent years upheld several complaints about such inclusive items and CAP member organisations have maintained their insistence that the word “free” should be reserved for things that are truly free.
Now an ASA adjudication on a complaint about a TV commercial has stopped broadcast ads from claiming “free” when they really mean inclusive. Click here to read the adjudication and "note on the use of the word "free" ". Because that judgement overturns custom and practice in TV and radio commercials, BCAP has given the industry a 6 month period of grace in which to comply. But expect the BACC and the RACC to start complying with the adjudication straight away in their clearance decisions.
Two examples, then, of better consistency in ads between the different media, a direct result of the new ASA one-stop shop ad regulator.