comparative advertising campaign
the challenge:
A competitor had been running a comparative advertising
campaign for some time, based on research that did not appear to be
‘statistically significant’. This had the potential to
mislead the public and was having an adverse impact on our client’s
sales.
our approach:
Our proposed solution was to make a formal complaint to the
Advertising Standards Association (ASA). The complaint was on
the grounds of protecting the public from being misled by the use
of insignificant statistical information, rather than a trade
disagreement. We drafted a letter of complaint to deal
objectively with the statistical issues, backed by independent
experts. We referred to consumer concerns, evidenced by
several blogs which had been set up by members of the public.
We also commented upon a draft recommendation from ASA.
the result:
ASA have ruled that ‘the ad should not be broadcast again in its
current form’, concluding that it was likely to mislead and could
not be supported by sufficiently robust evidence. This has
prevented the comparative advert being shown on prime time
television, and also resulted in significant press coverage of the
decision, both printed and online, generating headlines such as
“Roads to Perdition” and “… Ad Banned by Watchdog”.