Feeds

'As seen on TV' claims can't be made about unbranded props

Ad body: Cannot refer to appearance in paid-for ad either...

Remote control for virtualized desktops

Companies cannot claim that the product they are advertising is '... as seen on TV ' or '... as seen in' certain publications if those products merely featured as unbranded props in programmes or in paid-for ads in those mediums, an ad body has said.

The Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) said it could be misleading for marketers to make 'as seen' claims unless they had evidence of the products being editorially assessed, endorsed or reviewed on programmes or in publications.

CAP, which is responsible for writing the rules governing print and other non-broadcast advertising, said a ruling by the UK's advertising watchdog last month on ads for bed mattresses had "raised the bar" in how 'as seen' claims could be used.

"The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) considered that using the product as an unbranded and unidentified prop in a homes make-over programme did not justify a claim that it had been ‘seen on TV’," CAP said in a statement. "Nor did it consider that the broadcast advertising of the product justified the claim."

"And in all but one publication, the ASA considered the advertiser had not justified the claims that the product had been seen in The Telegraph, Observer, Mail on Sunday, the Daily Mail or the Sunday Times," it said.

"Why did the ASA reach this conclusion? It considered that because consumers were likely to infer from the claim that those publications or programmes had exercised some form of editorial evaluation, endorsement or independent review – when this was not the case – the claim could mislead. So marketers wishing to make such claims about the coverage of their products should change them to 'As advertised in...' or similar," CAP said.

Under the CAP Code, marketing communications that "materially mislead" consumers or are "likely to do so" are prohibited.

Marketers are required to have "documentary evidence" in order to prove claims they make in ads. That evidence must be "likely" to be considered as "objective" by consumers and be "capable of objective substantiation". The CAP Code states that the ASA "may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation".

Making misleading claims in broadcast adverts is also prohibited under the BCAP Code. That Code sets out a separate set of rules governing acceptable advertising on TV and radio.

Copyright © 2012, Out-Law.com

Out-Law.com is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
BIG FAT Lies: Porky Pies about obesity
What really shortens lives? Reading this sort of crap in the papers
Be real, Apple: In-app goodie grab games AREN'T FREE – EU
Cupertino stands down after Euro legal threats
Assange™ slumps back on Ecuador's sofa after detention appeal binned
Swedish court rules there's 'great risk' WikiLeaker will dodge prosecution
prev story

Whitepapers

Choosing cloud Backup services
Demystify how you can address your data protection needs in your small- to medium-sized business and select the best online backup service to meet your needs.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
How to determine if cloud backup is right for your servers
Two key factors, technical feasibility and TCO economics, that backup and IT operations managers should consider when assessing cloud backup.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
The Heartbleed Bug: how to protect your business with Symantec
What happens when the next Heartbleed (or worse) comes along, and what can you do to weather another chapter in an all-too-familiar string of debilitating attacks?