case study

Defeating a case of comparative advertising

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 TV, 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”.