Talk is cheap and so is broadband.  But is it really “free”?

17 August 2006

“Free”.  It is a word that instantly grabs attention.  Everyone likes to think they are getting a bargain or, if it is “free”, something for nothing.  ”Free” is perhaps the favourite word in every consumer’s dictionary and the advertising industry is acutely aware of its strong appeal.  The use of the word in advertisements is nothing new but sometimes the way it is used can mislead.

Take the broadband market.  The number of broadband packages on offer to the public has proliferated in the last 12 months.  Fierce competition has driven prices down and as a result consumer demand has mushroomed.  Consumer choice has never been so great.  But many ads for broadband packages have attracted criticism for misleading consumers.

The ASA recently formally investigated and upheld complaints about Carphone Warehouse’s multi-media ad campaign for its TalkTalk telephone package that offered “free broadband forever”.  Click here to read the adjudication.  So, if advertisers are allowed to use the word “free”, how did Carphone Warehouse mislead consumers and what are the ramifications of the ruling for advertisers?

The ASA received 145 complaints that the TalkTalk (Talk3 International package) offer was misleading because:

• it suggested that the broadband was free whereas it involved a contractual commitment to a calls package, a connection charge of £29.99, monthly costs of £9.99 plus line rental (£20.99 in total ) and a disconnection fee of £70;
• it claimed that broadband was “free forever” and
• it was not clear enough that the availability of broadband depended on the consumer being connected to a qualifying telephone exchange and that those who were not would have to pay £10 a month for the broadband service.

TalkTalk argued that the Talk3 International (T3I) call package was brand new and that broadband was not part of the package but was an optional service that was provided at no extra cost to all subscribers.  The advertiser was adamant that its offer did not contradict clause 32.3 of the CAP Code, which states: “Promoters should not describe an individual element of a package as ’free’ if the cost of that element is included in the package price.”

Furthermore, TalkTalk said the offer was not an introductory one and the claim “free forever” was not misleading because it did not intend to charge for broadband.  TalkTalk believed it had made clear in the advertisements that the service was subject to availability.

The ASA upheld the complaints on all three points.  It ruled that, because T3I was a brand new package and the intention was that the broadband element would always be an optional extra to that package, broadband was a constituent part of the new T3I package.  Because it was available only as an option to people who paid a connection charge to sign up and who continued to pay a monthly charge, the ASA considered that broadband was an intrinsic part of the T3I package, which had not been available beforehand for a reasonable period of time; the broadband element, therefore, could not be described as “free”.

Because it considered that broadband could not be described as free,  the ASA also considered that describing it as “free forever” was misleading.  The ASA decided that, even if it could call its broadband “free”,  TalkTalk could not substantiate the “forever” claim: consumers who had signed up to the offer would continue to pay £20.99 a month and that meant broadband would become “inclusive” after a reasonable period and would not remain “free”.

Lastly, the ASA ruled that TalkTalk had not made clear enough to consumers that the broadband service was available without an extra charge only to homes that were connected to a TalkTalk exchange.  Those that were not would have to pay an extra £10 a month for the broadband service.

The ASA told TalkTalk not to broadcast or publish the ads again without amendment and to seek advice from the CAP Copy Advice team when preparing future non-broadcast ad campaigns that described the service as “free”.  The media were quick to seize on the adjudication, the media coverage of which was widespread and supportive.

In the crowded and ultra-competitive broadband market, the use of the word “free” has become common place.  The advertising codes do not prohibit advertisers from promoting their product or service as free but, as always, they should ensure that it truly is “free”.

The computers and telecommunications sectors should take note; CAP is closely monitoring their ads.  Consumers are benefiting from increased competition and a host of tempting broadband packages.  Advertisers have the responsibility of ensuring that their ads do not mislead otherwise the bubble of consumer enthusiasm might burst.  Talk is cheap, broadband is getting cheaper but seek advice before you call it “free”.

For the best-informed advice, for non-broadcast ads, ask the CAP Copy Advice team; for radio ads, ask the RACC and, for TV ads, ask the BACC.