ASA Adjudication on Blinck Amsterdam

Ad

A TV ad for a mobile moving wallpaper subscription service. The ad claimed "Get the best animated screensavers on your mobile ... amaze your friends with the coolest moving wallpapers; they're wicked, they're great ...". The on-screen text said "Join MOVE for £9 per week, 3 images every week ... Min. age 16+ with bill payers permission". The voiceover at the end of the ad, which had been speeded up, said "£1.50 per SMS, 6 per week".

Issue

The viewers, who believed the ad was aimed at children, complained that it exploited them, because it did not make the cost and nature of the subscription service clear enough.

BCAP TV Code

Response

Blinck Amsterdam (Blinck) said they ensured their ads were scheduled around programmes that targeted 16-34-year-olds, not children. Nevertheless, they said they had inserted on-screen text to make clear the ad offered a subscription service that was not for children; they pointed out that they had quoted the price "per week", stated "Unsubscribe?", inserted details of their website and stated "Min. age 16+".  They said the voiceover also stated that the ad was for a subscription service and included the costs associated with it.  They said this information was clearly repeated in their customer care website.  They also explained that the first message received by a subscriber was a free customer care message that explained the pricing mechanism and also made clear it was an ongoing service that required de-registration.  

The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) said they had considered the Independent Committee for the Supervision of Standards of the Telephone Information Services (ICSTIS) Code of Practice when approving the ad, but did not accept that the section relating to childrens services was relevant, because they believed the ad did not promote a children's service; they said the ad featured images that would have equal appeal to children and adults and were similar to hundreds of other ads that they had approved in the past.  They believed the ad complied with the ICSTIS rules that required the cost and frequency of the service to be indicated in both sound and vision.  They pointed out that the on-screen text indicated that callers must be over 16 years old, and younger children who might not be aware of that text were protected by the scheduling restriction that prevented it from being shown around programmes aimed specifically at children.  The BACC said they had not identified any problems with the speed or clarity of the voiceover and emphasised that they believed parents should accept a degree of responsibility for children's misuse of their mobile phones.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA acknowledged that the ad had been scheduled away from childrens programmes and considered that, although the ad could appeal to some children, it did not directly target them.  We considered that the price of each text and the number of texts sent per week were important conditions that were likely to affect a viewer's decision to purchase a wallpaper from Blinck, but acknowledged that the on-screen text and customer care texts included the price and nature of the subscription service.  We therefore concluded that the cost and nature of the subscription service had been made sufficiently clear.

We investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising), 5.3.1 (Accurate pricing), 7.1.1 (Children's inexperience), 7.2.4 (Direct Response) and 11.1.1 (Premium rate telephone services), but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.