Upload
citynewstoronto
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
1/12
Annual Ad Complaints Report
2015 Year in Review
SEND
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
2/12
I N TRODUCT ION
1Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
As Saas CaaaFounded in 1957, ASC is the naonal independent adversing
industry self-regulatory body commied to creang and
maintaining public condence in adversing. ASC members
leading adversers, adversing agencies, media organizaons,
and suppliers to the adversing industry are commied
to supporng responsible and eecve adversing
self-regulaon. A not-for-prot organizaon, ASC administers
the Canadian Code of Adversing Standards, the principal
instrument of adversing self-regulaon in Canada, and a
naonal mechanism for accepng and responding to consumerscomplaints about adversing.
Introducon 1
2015 Highlights 3
2015 Year in Review 4
The Consumer Complaint Procedure 10
The Standards Councils 11
To Submit a Consumer Complaint 11
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
3/12
I N TRODUCT ION
2Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
An effeCtive ConSumerreSponSe meChAniSm iS
eSSentiAl to mAintAiningpubliC ConfidenCe inAdvertiSing.
At Adversing Standards Canada (ASC) we recognize that an eecve
consumer response mechanism is essenal to maintaining public
condence in adversing. Through ASCs Consumer Complaint
Procedure, we accept and respond to consumers complaints about
adversing appearing in Canadian media.
Reporng on complaints upheld by ASCs independent Standards
Councils is an important part of the process. The Complaint Case
Summaries provide invaluable learning for both the adversing
industry and the public regarding how Councils interpret and apply
theCanadian Code of Adversing Standards.
This 2015 Ad Complaints Report provides an account of the number
of consumer complaints received and invesgated over the past
year, informaon about the types of complaints upheld, and insights
regarding consumer concerns in 2015.
For more informaon about complaints upheld by Councils from
January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015, see the Case Summaries
published on our web site at:
asaas.c/cas2015
A g ASCsrscs o
To learn more about the
Canadian Code of Adversing
Standards, Interpretaon
Guidelines and the Consumer
Complaints Process, visit:
asaas.c
Online resources include:
Canadian Code of
Ads Sadads ia gs
ASC Ass
A Cas r
(including Complaint Case
Sas)
Consumer Complaint
Sss f
http://adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReports.aspx?periodyear=2015http://www.adstandards.com/en/http://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/theCode.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/theCode.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/interpretingTheCode.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/standards/ASCAdvisories.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/report.asphttp://www.adstandards.com/en/standards/adComplaintsreportscurrent.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/standards/adComplaintsreportscurrent.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ConsumerComplaints/howToSubmitAComplaint.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ConsumerComplaints/howToSubmitAComplaint.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ConsumerComplaints/howToSubmitAComplaint.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ConsumerComplaints/howToSubmitAComplaint.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/standards/adComplaintsreportscurrent.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/standards/adComplaintsreportscurrent.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/report.asphttp://www.adstandards.com/en/standards/ASCAdvisories.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/interpretingTheCode.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/theCode.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/theCode.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/http://adstandards.com/adcomplaintsreporthttp://adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReports.aspx?periodyear=20157/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
4/12
xx
3Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
122 assadministravely resolved
134 cas involving
met the Code accacca
1,268 cas
242 casabout 50 assupheld by Councils
as -ccaazas the highest by category
273cas received about
referred to Councils about
291cas
1,135ass
1,774cas received about
2015 hs
77 ass
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
5/124Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
OverviewIn 2015, consumers submied 1,774 complaints to
ASC. Of these, 1,268 complaints met the criteria for
acceptance under the Canadian Code of Adversing
Standards(Code). The remaining 506 complaints could
not be pursued because they did not fall within the
Codeacceptance criteria. These included: complaints
in which no specic adversement was idened;
complaints about adversements that were no longer
current; complaints about foreign adversing or
polical or elecon adversing; and complaints about
adversements that did not meet theCodedenion
of adversing.
During 2015, the independent Councils adjudicated
291 complaints about 77 adversements. Of these,
242 complaints were upheld about 50 adversements.
Case Summaries of these upheld complaints can be
found at:asaas.c/cas2015
An addional 134 complaints about 122
adversements were Administravely Resolved by
ASC sta.
ComplAintS SummAry 2015 ComplAintS AdS/CASeS
Received by ASC 1,774 1,135
Met Codeacceptance criteria 1,268 776
Administravely resolved by sta 134 122
Raised potenal Codeissues & forwarded to Councils 291 77
Upheld by Councils 242 50
2015 ya i rw
http://adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReportsCurrent.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReports.aspx?periodyear=2015http://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReports.aspx?periodyear=2015http://adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReportsCurrent.aspx7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
6/12
2015 Year in Review
5Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
Asa rs Cas
ASC uses a streamlined procedure to handle simple,
non-complicated complaints, such as price errors in
retail advertising. Complaints that raise issues under
Clause 1 (Accuracy and Clarity) and/or Clause 3 (Price
Claims) are Administratively Resolved by ASC staff ifthe advertiser promptly withdraws the advertisement
and takes corrective action after being notified of the
complaint by ASC. Complaints handled in this manner
are not forwarded to Councils for adjudication.
Cas CodeClause
The Codesets the standards for acceptable advertising
and provides the basis for the review and adjudication
of consumer complaints about advertising. Of the
1,268 complaints that met the Codeacceptance
criteria, most involved concerns relating to:
Accuracy and Clarity (Clause 1) and Price
Claims (Clause 3)
Safety (Clause 10)
Unacceptable Depictions and Portrayals (Clause 14)
Cas 1 (Accac a Ca) a Cas 3(pc Cas)
In 2015, ASC reviewed 717 complaints (about 552
advertisements) alleging misleading or inaccurate
advertising (Clauses 1 and/or 3). Ultimately, Councils
upheld 167 complaints about 43 advertisements.
These involved advertisements that omitted relevant
information, did not clearly state all pertinent details
of an offer, and contained unsubstantiated claims.
Cas 14 (uacca dcsa paas)
Most complaints evaluated under Clause 14 involve
subjective matters of personal taste or preference and
do not ultimately raise issues under the Code.
453 complaints about 152 advertisements were
reviewed under Clause 14. Of these, Councils
adjudicated and upheld 92 complaints about seven
advertisements. These included advertisements
that Councils found demeaned women, and
advertisements that offended standards of public
decency. The balance did not meet the threshold to
raise issues under this clause.
Cas 10 (Sa)
A total of 23 complaints about 21 advertisements
involved safety concerns, and two were upheld about
two advertisements.
Oh Causs
Cas 2 (dss As tcqs)
In 2015, seven complaints about six advertisements
were pursued under this clause, and two were upheldabout two advertisements.
Cas 4 (ba a Swc)
Eight complaints were reviewed about eight
advertisements, and none were upheld.
Cas 8 (pssa a Scc Cas)
109 complaints were pursued about 11
advertisements, and 102 were upheld about four
advertisements.
Cas 11 (Sss a fas)
In 2015, two complaints were submitted about two
advertisements. Both were upheld by Councils.
2015 Consumer Complaints Case Summaries:
asaas.c/cas2015
complaints reviewed
alleging misleading or
inaccurate adversing
717
http://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReports.aspx?periodyear=2015http://www.adstandards.com/en/Standards/adComplaintsReports.aspx?periodyear=20157/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
7/12
2015 Year in Review
6Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
Clause 1
Accac a Caand
Clause 3
pc Cas
717
167
Complaintsc
Complaints
a
43ads:
Clause 2
dss Astcqs
7
2
Complaintsc
Complaints
a
2ads:
Clause 4
ba a Swc
8
0
Complaintsc
Complaints
Clause 12
As C
1
0
Complaintsc
Complaints
a
2ads:
Clause 10
Sa
23
2
Complaintsc
Complaints
a
2ads:
Clause 11
Sss a fas
2
2
Complaintsc
Complaints
a
4ads:
Clause 8
pssa aScc Cas
109
102
Complaintsc
Complaints
a
7ads:
Clause 14
uacca dcsa paas
453
92
Complaintsc
Complaints
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
8/12
2015 Year in Review
7Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
Cas Ca As
In 2015, ASC received an unusually high
number of complaints about several
adversements by not-for-prot advocacy
groups that garnered considerablemedia aenon. For the rst me,
more complaints were submied about
adversing by non-commercial organizaons
than any other category (273). This was
followed by complaints about retail
adversing, which aracted 210 complaints.
Third, with 114 complaints, was adversing
for cars, motorized vehicles and automove
products/services.
Cas ma
Adversing on television, with
671 complaints, garnered the highest
number of complaints of any medium.
Digital adversing generated the secondhighest number of complaints (348).
Complaints regarding adversing in this
category primarily related to adversing
on adverser-owned websites. Direct
Markeng followed with 248 complaints.
Cas Ca
Top ten categories
Reta
il
Leisu
rese
rvice
s
Service
s(ot
her)
Ener
gy,w
ater,
uli
es
Trave
lSer
vices
Ente
rtain
men
tSer
vices
Non-
com
mer
cial
Food
Cars
andM
otor
ized
vehic
les
Finan
cialS
ervic
es
273
210
114106 104 103
7761 55 54
94
175 00
98
91
21
2
Complaints received
Complaints upheld
Cas ma t
Top ten media types
Television 671
Out-of-home 221
Point-of-Sale 57
Digital 348
Brochures/Flyers 110
Newspapers 48
Direct Markeng 248
Radio 94
Magazines
Packaging andLabelling
19
9
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
9/12
2015 Year in Review
8Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
Cs Ccs
t g t? p As Cas
Canadians are generally skepcal when it comes
to adversing. This was conrmed in ASCs 2014
Cosu Pspcs o Adsreport,
which revealed that the top concern cited by surveyrespondents who had seen, read or heard an
adversement they considered to be unacceptable
was a misleading or unrealisc representaon of an
adversed product or service.
Complaints about seven dierent adversements were
reviewed in 2015, and found by the Standards Council
to contravene Clauses 1(e) (Accuracy and Clarity) and
Clause 8 (Scienc and Professional Claims).
CodeCas 1() (Accac a Ca)Both in principle and pracce, all adversing
claims and representaons must be supportable.
If the support on which an adversed claim or
representaon depends is test or survey data, such
data must be reasonably competent and reliable,
reecng accepted principles of research design and
execuon that characterize the current state of the
art. At the same me, however, such research should
be economically and technically feasible, with due
recognion of the various costs of doing business.
CodeCas 8 (pssa Scc Cas)
Adversements must not distort the true meaning
of statements made by professionals or scienc
authories. Adversing claims must not imply that
they have a scienc basis that they do not truly
possess. Any scienc, professional or authoritave
claims or statements must be applicable to the
Canadian context, unless otherwise clearly stated.
Whether the adverser is a non-prot advocacyorganizaon or a commercial adverser, the
Coderequires that all adversing claims must be
supportable. This means that the adverser must
demonstrate to the sasfacon of ASC and Councils
that it possesses robust scienc evidence to support
its adversing claims. As well, the evidence must
be relevant to the Canadian context. For example,
in the case of claims relang to health and science,
Council has considered ocial statements by Health
Canada and other Canadian government bodies as
authoritave. On the other hand, newspaper arcles,
favourable tesmonials and opinions provided by
users of a product or service are generally not be
considered sucient to prove such claims.
The following are examples of cases in which the
claims were not adequately substanated as required
under the Code.
Claims ga Wa a Ca Ca
An advocacy organizaon made claims regarding
global warming and climate change in out-of-home
adversements, specically:
that the sun, not human acvity was the main driver
of climate change, and
that global warming stopped naturally 16+ years ago.
A dierent advocacy organizaon claimed in transit
adversements that consumpon of animal products
was the top contributor to climate change.
Aer carefully considering the evidence submied
by the adversers, Council found that the categorical
and unequivocal claims could not be supported bythe preponderance of current evidence, thus the
adversements contravened Clauses 1(e) and 8.
Claims ra Qa mca Wa
In a direct mail adversement, an adverser of water
puricaon systems claimed that there were negave
health eects due to contaminants, such as chlorine,
in a parcular municipalitys water supply. In coming
to its decision, Council considered Health Canadas
Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality, which
specically stated that no adverse health eects have
been observed in humans from consuming water with
high chlorine levels over a short period of me to
be authoritave. As a result, Council did not nd the
claim to be supportable under Clauses 1(e) and 8.
http://www.adstandards.com/en/ASCLibrary/2014ASCConsumerResearch.pdfhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ASCLibrary/2014ASCConsumerResearch.pdfhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ASCLibrary/2014ASCConsumerResearch.pdfhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ASCLibrary/2014ASCConsumerResearch.pdf7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
10/12
2015 Year in Review
9Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
is Wa y S Wa y g?
Another hot topic in 2015 was the depicon of
food in commercials for quick service restaurants.
A number of complainants, parcularly from
Quebec, told us that the sandwiches they were
served in some restaurants did not resemble theproducts featured in television commercials.
CodeCas 1(a) (Accac a Ca)
Adversements must not contain inaccurate,
decepve or otherwise misleading claims,
statements, illustraons or representaons,
either direct or implied, with regard to any
idened or idenable product or service.
While most of these complaints did not ulmately
raise issues under this clause, Council upheld
ve complaints about a commercial that the
complainants alleged exaggerated the amount of
lobster in the adversed lobster sandwich.
Of course, quick service restaurants seek to present
their products in the best possible light, and Council
understands that the same me and care cannot
possibly go into making a sandwich at a restaurant
as at a photo shoot. Nonetheless, the adversing
must reasonably resemble what someone can
expect to be served at the restaurant.
US DOllAr PriCing inCAnADiAn ADvertiSementS
Adversers that cater to the Canadian marketmust ensure that if the quoted price is not listed
in Canadian dollars, then that fact must be clearly
indicated to the consumer in the adversement.
Clause 3(c) (Price Claims) of the Codestates
that: Prices quoted in adversements in
Canadian media, other than in Canadian funds,
must be so idened.
With the decline in value of the Canadian dollar
against the US dollar, this issue is of increasing
concern to Canadian consumers. In 2015, ASCreceived a number of complaints regarding
adversements that did not clearly state that the
price of the adversed product/service was in
US dollars.
In one case, a company adversed the prices of
fragrances in Canadian currency on its website.
However, the complaints purchase was actually
charged in US funds. Although the fact that all
charges and refunds are posted in US dollars was
included in the customer service secon of the
adversers website, Council found that this condion
was of such signicance that it should have been
prominently stated on each page of the website.
Because it was not, Council found the adversement
was misleading.
Even when a price is correctly stated as being in
US dollars, some Canadians are irritated. For example,
a French infomercial featured a red maple leaf with
the statement ships to Canada. Some consumers
in Quebec told us that they perceive this to be a
deliberate aempt to confuse viewers, parcularlywhen the commercial was translated into French for
the Quebec market. Consumers asked: Why translate
the commercial, but not convert the currency?
...adss us o
coa accua, dcp
o ohws sad cas,
sas, usaos o
psaos...
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
11/12
xx
10Adversing Standards Canada
Annual Ad Complaints Report | 2015 Year in Review
SEND
APPEAL
t Cs Ca pc
Established by the Canadian adversing industry over 50 years ago, the Consumer
Complaint Procedureprovides Canadian consumers with a mechanism to submitwrien complaints about adversing currently running in Canadian media.
Ca rc
Each wrien consumer complaint is reviewed by ASC against
the Canadian Code of Adversing Standards.
1
pa rw
ASC conducts a preliminary evaluaon of the complaint. If thecomplaint does not raise an issue under theCode, ASC sends
a leer of explanaon.
2
hw Cas a ha
If the complaint raises an issue under the Code, the adverser is
requested to provide its comments on the complainants concerns.
If a Codeissue remains, the complaint is forwarded to Council for
adjudicaon.
3
Cc rw a dcs
Complaints forwarded to Council are carefully reviewed under the
Code.If Council determines that the adversement contravenes
one or more clauses of the Code, Council will uphold the complaint.
The adverser is asked to withdraw or amend the adversing.
4
Aa a Cc dcs
If the consumer or adverser disagrees with Councils decision,
the consumer or adverser can request an appeal.
5
7/26/2019 2015 Ad Complaints Report
12/12
Cac ia
t oc
Adversing Standards Canada
175 Bloor Street East
South Tower, Suite 1801
Toronto, Ontario M4W 3R8
Phone: (416) 961-6311
@asaas.cwww.asaas.c
ma oc
Adversing Standards Canada
2015 Peel Street
Suite 915
Montreal, Quebec H3A 1T8
Phone: (514) 931-8060
2016 Adversing Standards Canada
This report is the property of Adversing
Standards Canada and may not be
reproduced, in whole, or in part, without
prior express wrien consent from
Adversing Standards Canada.
t S a Cs Ca
If you have a concern about an ad you see or
hear currently running in Canadian media, visit
ASCs web site to learn about how to submit
a consumer complaint.
t Saas Ccs
ASCs independent, volunteer Standards Councils
(Councils) play a vital role in ensuring objecve and
fair complaint adjudicaon. While ASC administers
the process by which consumers submit their wrien
complaints about adversements, those complaintsthat raise potenal issues under the Codeare
reviewed and adjudicated by Councils. The Councils
include senior industry and public representaves
from across Canada, who are commied to help
ensure that Canadian adversing is truthful, fair
and accurate.
The complete list of Standards Council representaves
is available.
Complaints can be submied to
ASC using the Online Complaint
Sss f
or
mail your wrien complaint to:
As Saas Caaa
175 Bloor St. EastSouth Tower, Suite 1801
Toronto, ON, M4W 3R8
mailto:info%40adstandards.com?subject=http://www.adstandards.com/en/http://www.adstandards.com/en/ConsumerComplaints/consumerResponseCouncils.aspxhttp://adstandards.com/eComplaints/#enhttp://adstandards.com/eComplaints/#enhttp://adstandards.com/eComplaints/#enhttp://adstandards.com/eComplaints/#enhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/ConsumerComplaints/consumerResponseCouncils.aspxhttp://www.adstandards.com/en/mailto:info%40adstandards.com?subject=