Scribd
Upload
31 views5 pages

TASK 11 - Regulatory

The ASA upheld a complaint against a Tesco advertisement for its "Brand Guarantee" price match scheme. While consumers were likely familiar with price match schemes generally, the ad did not make it sufficiently clear that purchasing a minimum of 10 different products was required to qualify. The headline claim "Never pay more for your branded shop" implied a single branded item would qualify, contradicting the small print condition. The ASA determined the minimum purchase restriction was significant enough that it needed to be prominently disclosed, rather than included only in small print, to avoid misleading consumers.

Uploaded by

Thomas Sim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
31 views5 pages

TASK 11 - Regulatory

The ASA upheld a complaint against a Tesco advertisement for its "Brand Guarantee" price match scheme. While consumers were likely familiar with price match schemes generally, the ad did not make it sufficiently clear that purchasing a minimum of 10 different products was required to qualify. The headline claim "Never pay more for your branded shop" implied a single branded item would qualify, contradicting the small print condition. The ASA determined the minimum purchase restriction was significant enough that it needed to be prominently disclosed, rather than included only in small print, to avoid misleading consumers.

Uploaded by

Thomas Sim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Task 11: Regulatory Body

How is the ASA funded?


The ASA is funded by advertisers through an arms length arrangement that
guarantees the ASAs independence.
Collected by the Advertising Standards Board of Finance (Asbof) and the
Broadcast Advertising Standards Board of Finance (Basbof), the 0.1% levy on the
cost of buying advertising space and the 0.2% levy on some direct mail ensures
the ASA is adequately funded to keep UK advertising standards high. We also
receive a small income from charging for some seminars and premium industry
advice services.
We receive no Government funding and therefore our work is free to the tax
payer.
The levy system means the ASA has the necessary resources to handle more
than 30,000 complaints each year and independently check thousands of ads
every year. In addition, the funding supports CAPs Copy Advice service which
provides pre-publication advice to advertisers, agencies and the media.
The separate funding mechanism ensures that the ASA does not know which
advertisers choose to fund the system or the amount they contribute.
The levy is the only part of the system that is voluntary. Advertisers can choose
to pay the levy, but they cannot choose to comply with the Advertising Codes or
the ASAs rulings.
I got all of this information from the official ASA website at this URL
https://www.asa.org.uk/About-ASA/Funding.aspx

What exactly does the ASA do?


The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is the UKs independent regulator of
advertising across all media.
Our purpose and ambition
Our purpose is to make advertisements responsible and our ambition is to make
every UK ad a responsible ad.
What we do is important
Were passionate about what we do because responsible advertisements are
good for people, society and advertisers

The five strands of our strategy


1 Understanding: Well be an authority on advertising and active on issues that
cause societal concern. Well be open to calls for regulatory change, acting
purposefully and in a timely fashion, while being fair and balanced in our
assessment of the evidence and arguments
2 Support: Well provide support to advertisers to help them create responsible
ads. Well increase, improve and better target our advice and training so every
business has access to the information and support it needs
3 Impact: Well spend more time on matters that make the biggest difference.
Focussing on our existing remit, well spend less time tackling ads that cause
little detriment to consumers or on the vulnerable. But, where a complaint
indicates that the rules have been broken, we will always do something
4 Proactive: Well be proactive and work with others. Well use a wide range of
information to identify and tackle problems to make sure ads are responsible,
even if we havent officially received a complaint.
5 Awareness: Well increase awareness of the ASA and CAP. We will make sure
that the public, civil society and the industry know who we are and what we can
do, so they can engage with us when they need to, and have confidence in our
work.
Read our detailed strategy document, which outlines the case for change.
Our shared values are to be:
- Consistent and proportionate
- Reliable and ethical
- Fair and respectful to all
- Accessible and helpful
- Intelligent and thorough, but also timely and proportionate
- Open and accountable, acting with integrity and never being afraid to admit
when were wrong
- An excellent team, inspiring excellence in each other
Our external stakeholders will also find us:

Independent in administering the Advertising Codes

Evidence-based, targeted and consistent

Reflective of society, not a social engineer


I got all of this information from the official ASA website at this URL
https://www.asa.org.uk/About-ASA/Strategy.aspx

How does the self-regulation of non-broadcast advertising work?


Non-broadcast advertising
There are many millions of non-broadcast ads published every year in the UK, so
it would be impossible to pre-clear every one of them. For example, there are
more than 30 million press advertisements and 100 million pieces of direct
marketing every year.
However, lots of advice and guidance is available through CAP Advice and
Training. This includes free bespoke pre-publication advice from Copy Advice and
online resources that advertisers, agencies and media can use to check the
latest positions on hundreds of different advertising issues.

I got all of this information from the official ASA website at this URL
https://www.asa.org.uk/About-ASA/About-regulation.aspx

How does regulation work after an advertisement has appeared and what
sanctions can the ASA impose?
Regulation after an advertisement has appeared
Even though many steps are taken to ensure ads are in line with the Codes
before they are aired or published, consumers have the right to complain about
ads they have seen, which they believe to be misleading, harmful or offensive.
The ASA can act on just one complaint. We dont play a numbers game: our
concern is whether the Codes have been breached.
I got all of this information from the official ASA website at this URL
https://www.asa.org.uk/About-ASA/About-regulation.aspx
Complaint #1

Ad
A national press ad for Tesco, seen in October 2015, was headlined Never pay
more for your branded shop. Text below stated, If its cheaper at Asda,
Morrisons or Sainsburys, well take the money off your bill at the till. It included
an image of a character associated with a flour brand holding an icon that
carried the text Brand Guarantee.
Small print included Min. basket of 10 different products, including 1
comparable branded product. Total price of branded grocery shop compared with
Asda, Morrisons and Sainsburys and if cheaper elsewhere the difference will be
taken off your bill .
Issue
Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd, who believed the ad did not make the minimum
purchase restriction sufficiently clear, challenged whether the claim Never pay
more for your branded shop was misleading.
CAP Code (Edition 12)
3.13.33.333.9
Response
Tesco Stores Ltd believed the ad communicated the scheme clearly to consumers
and was consistent with the industrys wider approach to price match
advertising. They understood consumers were familiar with how price match

schemes worked and that a minimum spend requirement generally applied. They
believed the ad made clear that a branded shop was made up of multiple
products, which was something consumers were also already familiar with. Tesco
considered the combination of the text and the Brand Guarantee logo
communicated to consumers that the ad related to a price match scheme for
branded products in which prices were matched against ASDA, Morrisons and
Sainsburys, and that it worked by taking money off at the till if the branded shop
cost more at Tesco.
Tesco said that of the conditions set out in the small print the first was the
minimum purchase requirement, and that was communicated in a context in
which, as above, it was clear that the scheme applied to the shop as a whole.
The first part of the small print also made clear what qualified as a branded shop
and informed consumers where they could find further information. Tesco
accepted that the minimum purchase requirement was a condition that should
be brought to consumers attention, however, they believed it was sufficient to
do so in small print, because it was not so significant as to contradict the
headline claim (but instead clarified the nature of a branded shop). They also
said the condition was of no more importance than those such as geographical
restrictions or maximum refunds, which were typically also in small print. They
said price match schemes were usually aimed at shops that included multiple
items and that their data showed the average Brand Guarantee shop contained
24.4 items, whereas the minimum number to qualify for the match was ten.
Tesco had taken advice from the CAP Copy Advice team, who believed the ad
was likely to be acceptable in relation to the minimum purchase requirement.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered consumers were likely to be familiar with the concept of
price match schemes, but that they would not necessarily be aware of the
conditions involved, or that there might be a minimum purchase requirement, in
particular if an ad suggested otherwise. Research data published by the CMA
(included in its July 2015 report on Pricing Practices in the Groceries Market,
produced in response to a super complaint from Which?), indicated that of
respondents who correctly understood that their planned shop supermarket had
a price matching scheme, 25% reported that they had no idea how it worked and
a further 40% had only a rough idea. We agreed with the CMAs statement about
the importance of retailers communicating clearly with consumers to help them
understand how schemes operated and enable them to take informed decisions.
We acknowledged Tesco had consulted the Copy Advice team, whose view was
that it was likely to be acceptable to set the minimum purchase requirement out
in small print. The ad included a single brand character, a prominent reference to
the Brand Guarantee and the text branded shop. We considered it was clear
the scheme related only to branded, as opposed to own-brand, items. However,
we also considered it was not sufficiently clear from the main body of the ad that
it was necessary to buy multiple products in order to qualify. In addition, we
considered Never pay more for your branded shop was an absolute claim that

was likely to be understood by consumers to mean that if they purchased


branded good(s), they would qualify for the price match against the named
retailers. While the small print said it was necessary to purchase at least ten
different items, including one comparable branded product, for the Brand
Guarantee to apply, we considered that contradicted the headline claim and was
not sufficiently prominent to counteract the misleading impression created by it.
We therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading
advertising), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.33 (Comparisons with identifiable
competitors).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Tesco Stores Ltd to
ensure significant conditions were made sufficiently clear in future, to avoid
being misleading.

You might also like