Cookies policy statement
We are using cookies on our site to provide you with the best user experience.
Disabling cookies may prevent our website from working efficiently. Click ok to remove this message (we will remember your choice).
OK

ASA Adjudication on MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd

MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd t/a Little Tikes

Regent Business Park
6 Presley Way
Crownhill
Milton Keynes
MK8 0ES

Date:

8 April 2009

Media:

Television

Sector:

Leisure

Number of complaints:

1

Complaint Ref:

78494

Ad

A TV ad for a children's video camera opened with a man sleeping, shown through the viewfinder of the video camera, as a boy said "Smile". The voiceover stated "The Little Tikes My Real Digital Video Camera. A real digital video camera that lets them shoot everywhere their imagination goes". The ad then featured a dog running, as shown through the viewfinder of the camera, held by the boy. The voiceover continued "This camera doesn't mind a few bumps, not even afraid of the water. So easy for little tikes to shoot real, moving video and dive in for that perfect shot". The ad showed the boy using the camera under water. The final shot of the ad showed the family watching the recorded underwater material on their TV. The close-up views of the played-back recorded material, shown throughout the ad, appeared clear and of high quality.

Issue

The complainant, who had bought the product for his child but had found that the recorded material was of lower quality than that shown in the ad, challenged whether the ad was misleading.

BCAP TV Code

Response

Clearcast said MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd (MGA) had sent them a sample of the product featured in the ad, which they tested. Clearcast said they believed the quality of the images produced by the camera matched that quality depicted in the ad. They said they had also been given an assurance by MGA that the viewfinder and playback footage from the camera featured in the ad had not been enhanced in post-production.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted Clearcast's response. We tested the product ourselves following the instructions provided. We considered, after testing, that the recorded video footage was clear and of good quality, and comparable to that shown in the ad. We also considered that the digital stills photos taken with the product were of good quality. We therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.

We investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1.1 (Misleading advertising) and 5.2.2 (Implications) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)

Making a complaint

Find out what types of ads we deal with and how to make a complaint.

How to complain

Adjudications

View our latest weekly ASA adjudications or search for rulings from the last five years.

Adjudications

Non-compliant online advertisers

Check the list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Non-compliant online advertisers

Sign up

Sign up for adjudications alerts and newsletters.

Sign up

Already registered? Log in

Follow Us

For ASA news, including our weekly rulings, press releases, research and reports.
ASA_UK

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

We work hard to ensure our complaints procedures are transparent. Here we answer some commonly asked questions about how we handle complaints.

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London WC1V 6QT  |  Copyright © 2012 ASA