Feeds

Sky taken to task for online promo cock-up

Broadcaster broke ASA rules after servers failed

Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile

Broadcaster Sky should have made sure its websites could handle the traffic generated by its promotional advertising, and should have made a web offer available on the phone once it ran into problems, the advertising regulator has said.

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has upheld complaints against Sky over people's inability to take advantage of a half-price offer on high-definition television (HD TV).

Four people complained that they could not access the offer on Sky's website. They phoned the company and were told that they could not receive the discount because it was an online-only offer.

Sky claimed that it did not accept that all the problems were down to its systems, and that it had not instructed its phone sales people to offer the deal because it could not be sure when an issue was caused by a failure of its website and when the failure was the customer's.

Customers said, though, that Sky staff admitted to them that the site had had problems.

"The complainants had experienced problems with the website several times over several days and the website had directed them to call the Sky helpline; some of the complainants stated that, on calling the number, the Sky staff member had conceded that they had problems with the website," said the ASA's ruling. "We considered that, because customers were unable to take advantage of the promotion due to technical difficulties, they would expect the offer to be fulfilled over the telephone."

The ASA said that Sky's failure to deal with the demand for the advertised promotion broke its rules on sales promotion administration.

"We considered that, by failing to administer the promotion adequately, Sky had caused unnecessary disappointment to some customers who had been unable to take advantage of the promotion," it said.

Other errors were found to have existed in the promotion, including an affiliate site's redirection of users to the wrong offer and that customers had been wrongly informed about the offer's closing date. But the ASA said that these errors were not breaches of its rules.

See: The ruling

Copyright © 2009, OUT-LAW.com

OUT-LAW.COM is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

More from The Register

next story
Azure TITSUP caused by INFINITE LOOP
Fat fingered geo-block kept Aussies in the dark
NASA launches new climate model at SC14
75 days of supercomputing later ...
Yahoo! blames! MONSTER! email! OUTAGE! on! CUT! CABLE! bungle!
Weekend woe for BT as telco struggles to restore service
You think the CLOUD's insecure? It's BETTER than UK.GOV's DATA CENTRES
We don't even know where some of them ARE – Maude
DEATH by COMMENTS: WordPress XSS vuln is BIGGEST for YEARS
Trio of XSS turns attackers into admins
Cloud unicorns are extinct so DiData cloud mess was YOUR fault
Applications need to be built to handle TITSUP incidents
BOFH: WHERE did this 'fax-enabled' printer UPGRADE come from?
Don't worry about that cable, it's part of the config
Astro-boffins start opening universe simulation data
Got a supercomputer? Want to simulate a universe? Here you go
prev story

Whitepapers

Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Getting started with customer-focused identity management
Learn why identity is a fundamental requirement to digital growth, and how without it there is no way to identify and engage customers in a meaningful way.
10 threats to successful enterprise endpoint backup
10 threats to a successful backup including issues with BYOD, slow backups and ineffective security.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
The hidden costs of self-signed SSL certificates
Exploring the true TCO for self-signed SSL certificates, including a side-by-side comparison of a self-signed architecture versus working with a third-party SSL vendor.