ASA Adjudication on Play Ltd

Ad

A poster, for Play.com (Play), was shown on an LCD screen with the strapline "Play.com makes Christmas". A two disc special edition of the Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull DVD was offered for £14.99. Small print stated "Prices are correct at the time of going to print. Play.com reserve the right to change prices. Subject to availability."

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading, because the small print at the foot of the ad was illegible.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Play explained that the font size of the small print was 97, meaning that the letters were 23 mm in height.  They said, by comparison, the standard font size for traditional 48 sheet poster advertising was 70.  They had therefore increased the font size by nearly 40% to ensure that the small print was legible.  Play argued that drivers were required to be able to read licence plates, which measured 79 mm in height, from a distance of 20 m (approx 66 feet).  They considered that the smallprint on the poster should therefore have been visible from almost 7 m (aprox 20 feet) away.

Play explained that the media owner advised against using small print on LCD screens but their media buying agency had not made them aware of this at the time they placed the ad.  They assured the ASA that, if they advertised on LCD screens in the future, they would take on board that the screen resolution could give rise to legibility problems.  They nevertheless considered that, because the information in the small print was unlikely to have been material to a customer's decision about whether to buy the product and because the advertised product was available and on sale at the advertised price for the duration of the poster campaign, consumers would not have been misled.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted Play had increased the font size of the small print on the poster by almost 40% and had therefore believed it would be legible.  We noted however that, despite this, it had been illegible.

We noted the small print advised readers that prices were correct at the time of going to print, that Play reserved the right to change prices and that the offer was subject to availability.   We also noted Plays comments that, given the fact that the price had not changed and that the product was available throughout the duration of the poster campaign, the small print did not contain material information about the offer and consumers would not therefore have been misled.

With the benefit of hindsight, we agreed with Play that the small print had been immaterial to the offer but we recognised that the circumstances could easily have been different.  We concluded that consumers were unlikely to have been misled on account of the illegibility of the small print but nevertheless reminded Play to take care when advertising on LCD screens in future.

We investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)