ASA Adjudication on QVC

Ad

A teleshopping ad for a router featured various demonstrations on how the router could be used.

Issue

The viewer complained that the broadcast was irresponsible, because he believed the demonstrations were carried out in an extremely dangerous manner, including several instances where the demonstrator's hand appeared to be very close to an unguarded cutter and without the appropriate safety measures in place.

Response

QVC said they always ensured their demonstrations were carried out with regard to health and safety regulations.  They said all products of this type underwent a health and safety risk assessment before they were broadcast to ensure they were demonstrated appropriately and personal protective equipment was used where necessary.  They maintained that the demonstrator was experienced in using such machines, and gave several examples of where they believed appropriate safety procedures had been ensured; they said the parallel fence and safety guard, which were both attached and could not be used without each other, were in place when routing both parts of the dovetail joint and, during the demonstration of the name plate, the presenter's hands were a safe distance from the bit; they explained that the demonstrator had deliberately chosen the wood sizes to ensure his hand were not too close to the bit and to enable the camera to see the router in operation.

QVC refuted the complainant's assertion that the demonstrator had said it was not necessary to use the fence, but argued that he had simply demonstrated some freehand jobs for which the fence could not be used; they maintained that the demonstrations were carried out responsibly.  QVC submitted the safety manual guide which accompanied the product.

Assessment

Complaint not upheld

The ASA noted the safety guide stated, amongst other things, that some wood-type products, such as MDF, required a face mask, and eye protection was important; we noted the demonstrator had adhered to and mentioned this during the demonstration.  He also said the product came with a safety guard and demonstrated situations where this might not be needed.  We acknowledged the reference to the instruction manual and concluded that the ad had highlighted sufficient safety precautions to ensure viewers would not be encouraged to use the router in contravention of the accompanying safety advice nor had it condoned such behaviour.

The ad was investigated under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 6.7 (Health and safety) but was not found in breach.

Action

No further action necessary