Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated of which two were Upheld and one was Not upheld.
Ad description
A website for TheCircle, www.thecircle.com, included:
a. a web page headed "PSYCHIC READINGS" that stated "Tested Psychics ... TheCircle is the UK's ONLY psychic reading portal with hand-picked and thoroughly tested readers. All our readers adhere to our strict ethical and professional regulations"; and
b. a web page headed "High quality psychics & flexible readings!" that stated "All about TheCircle.. We offer quality readings from the very best psychics [sic]. We now have nearly 300 expert readers in TheCircle, all vetted by our rigorous checking procedure". In a side bar headed "Quality Assurance" text stated "Only the best readers selected to work for us, 90% turned away".
Issue
The ASA received two complaints:
1. one complainant, who believed that other psychic providers selected and tested their readers, challenged whether the claim "TheCircle is the UK's ONLY psychic reading portal with hand-picked and thoroughly tested readers" in ad (a) could be substantiated;
2. one complainant, who did not believe that the readers provided by TheCircle had been tested or vetted, challenged whether the claims in ads (a) and (b) could be substantiated; and
3. one complainant challenged whether the claim "90% turned away" in ad (b) could be substantiated.
Response
1. Stream Live Ltd t/a TheCircle (TheCircle) said that as part of their competitor research they tracked and reviewed the interview and selection process of their competitors. They supplied a document that detailed the information they had collected, which they said clearly demonstrated that they had the most comprehensive and thorough recruitment process.
2. TheCircle provided a number of documents relating to their testing and recruitment process, which they said involved two stages, post application. They provided a copy of their testing and recruitment protocol, their application form and the form used by assessors during the testing process. They also provided test reading reports for two recent applicants.
3. TheCircle said they tracked all applicants through the recruitment process. They provided an extract from their recruitment database which showed how many candidates were turned away at the first and second stage of the process. They said their current 'decline' rate was approximately 80%.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA understood that TheCircle believed they had the most comprehensive and thorough recruitment process of the online psychic reading portals. However, we considered the claim "TheCircle is the UK's ONLY psychic reading portal with hand-picked and thoroughly tested readers" went further than a statement of belief and implied they were the only psychic reading portal with a recruitment process that involved some level of selection and testing. We understood from the comparative information they had provided that some of their competitors did use test readings as part of their recruitment process. We therefore concluded the claim had not been substantiated.
On this point ad (a) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising), 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation) and 3.38 3.38 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an unidentifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer. The elements of the comparison must not be selected to give the marketer an unrepresentative advantage. (Other comparisons).
2. Not upheld
We considered the claims in ads (a) and (b) that TheCircle's readers were "hand-picked and thoroughly tested" and "all vetted by our vigorous testing procedure" would be understood by consumers to mean that their recruitment process involved a level of selection and testing, and that not all applicants would be selected. We considered that the evidence demonstrated that they used a selection process for applicants, including a two-stage testing process, and that not all applicants would be successful. We therefore concluded the claims had been substantiated.
On this point we investigated ads (a) and (b) under 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation) but did not find it in breach.
3. Upheld
We considered that consumers would understand from the claim "90% turned away" that, of the applicants who reached the stage of being either accepted or rejected, 90% were rejected. TheCircle said their current decline rate was approximately 80%. However, the evidence suggested that, of the applicants who were either accepted or rejected in 2012, around 65% were rejected and 35% accepted. A significant number of applicants were neither accepted nor rejected as they did not appear to have returned forms to progress to the testing stage of the application process, but we did not consider they were relevant to the claim in question. Because around 65% of applicants were rejected, rather than the 90% claimed in the ad, we concluded the claim had not been substantiated.
On this point ad (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation).
Action
Ads (a) and (b) must not appear again in their current form. We told TheCircle to ensure they held robust substantiation when making objective claims.
