facebook rss twitter

Watchdog orders Three to ditch advert

by Sarah Griffiths on 10 March 2011, 15:41

Tags: Three (HKG:0013)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qa42d

Add to My Vault: x

Simply the best?

The advertising watchdog has ordered Three to pull an advert claiming it offers the best network for smartphones and broadband, following a complaint from just one member of the public.

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has apparently slapped Three's wrists after the complainant claimed the advert was misleading and Three's assertions could not be proved, Mobile News reported.

The captions that were problematic in the advert reportedly were: "Don't just take our word for it. We're rated No.1 network for mobile internet speed and value by smartphone users," and "Better for smartphones".

Three claimed the phrases derived from independent research, which was carried out by YouGov. However, the consumer apparently complained that Three's claims were deceptive, which was dismissed by ASA.

However the second part of the complaint, that the advert was misleading because Three did not offer any way for customers to compare its service to others, was upheld by the watchdog because the YouGov research is not available to the public.

ASA reportedly said: "We considered that that information should have been made available for the purpose of verifying the comparison and the ad should also therefore have included reference to the means by which that information could be reviewed."

However, Three apparently told the publication that it is standing by its findings, insisting they are accurate and that it is investigating how to make the YouGov research available to the public to get some extra mileage from its no doubt pricey ad campaign.

A Three spokesperson told Mobile News: "We are going to stick with the campaign and we are working with YouGov to resolve the issue of public verification and down the line we will find a way of demonstrating that we have come top in the categories. What will change is the means of referencing the facts more accurately so we will abide by that."



HEXUS Forums :: 5 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
I don't know about anybody else, but I really want to meet people like this and just kick them. Kick them in the shins, for having nothing else better to do with their time than to write letters to consumer agencies complaining about complete and total non-issues that 99.999999% of the population never even thought about.

It's the same in the UK with Ofcom. Who are the people who complain to Ofcom when a TV presenter makes a funny (if slightly negatively stereotypical) comment about something? I often imagine these people sitting down in front of their television each evening armed with a notebook and pen, ready to make notes of all the things they're going to complain about tomorrow.
I don't agree with you to be honest. I wouldn't write either, but in this case the ad was making claims that cannot be backed up.

It might be only a minor issue, but if little issues weren't picked up on and chased up, then we'd be flooded with all sorts of nonsense claims, and that would be a far bigger issue.
Its is a persons right to complain if they see something they don't like. If someone didn't stand up and say something, it would be giving large companies free reign to make claims about products that possibly may not be true. I feel that the info should be made public if such a claim has been made.
snootyjim
I don't agree with you to be honest. I wouldn't write either, but in this case the ad was making claims that cannot be backed up.

It might be only a minor issue, but if little issues weren't picked up on and chased up, then we'd be flooded with all sorts of nonsense claims, and that would be a far bigger issue.
+1 on that - as you say, they made claims that couldn't be backed up - so clearly a breach of the “truthful” part of the advertising code.

I actually tried to report them earlier (before The One Plan) because their storefronts were plastered with “Unlimited Internet” claims, whereas at the time you were limited to a 1GB or 5GB data allowance. ASA said it was a trading standards issue and the TS folks pointed me at the ASA. In the end I gave up, and got on with life.

Getting back to the meat of the article, actually I think Three do have the best value bundles (at the moment?) - especially that “The One Plan” of theirs; granted it's “Fair Use” limited, but they allow tethering etc. I just wish that someone who had better customer service (which to be honest wouldn't be difficult) could come close to matching them - I'd move in a heartbeat. I also haven't had many problems with speed etc, although when I went on holiday to N. Wales T-mobile seemed to have a better signal there.
AlexKitch
I don't know about anybody else, but I really want to meet people like this and just kick them.

Why? What's the problem with pointing out that an add is misleading when it clearly is misleading.

Sounds like someone needs to chill out a bit before they get locked up.