Ad description
Claims on the Model Advice website, viewed on 30 May 2011, included the text "UK's Premier Modelling Advice Service". Further text stated "Working with ..." followed by the logos of the Department for Business Innovation & Skills (BIS) and Directgov.
Issue
Clive Hurst challenged whether:
1. the claim "UK's Premier Modelling Advice Service" was misleading and could be substantiated;
2. the use of the BIS and Directgov logos was misleading, because it implied government endorsement of the advertiser; and
3. the advertiser was permitted to use the BIS and Directgov logos.
Response
1. Model Advice said it was the original company to run a model advice day where they provided tailored advice to people about their strengths and weaknesses, industry expectations depending on the type of modelling that suited them, and a list of reputable agencies that were appropriate to that type of modelling.
Model Advice said they offered a number of services and products and they were completely up-front about costs and had their price list displayed on their website. They said they made it very clear from the beginning that they were not an agency and could not actively look for, or guarantee, work for models, but they ensured that they offered the best advice for models to find work for themselves in a safe and informed way. They said they therefore considered that what they did was unique and invaluable and were justified in calling themselves the "UK's Premier Modelling Advice Service".
2. & 3. Model Advice said that BIS had given permission for them to display the logos on their website. BIS contacted the ASA on Model Advice’s behalf and said that Model Advice had offered to support BIS in promoting a campaign, launched in September 2009, around workers’ rights, which included information about employment agency regulations. They said they had encouraged Model Advice to use the BIS and Directgov logos, which linked to information about the campaign, because they considered them to be a useful contact point for a number of agency workers and hoped that traffic would flow from the Model Advice website to the relevant material on the BIS and Directgov websites. They said that their understanding with Model Advice was that they would continue to display the logos on their website whilst the campaign was ongoing, and they confirmed that it was ongoing at the time the complainant had viewed the website.
Assessment
1. Not upheld
The ASA considered that, when taken in context with the services offered by Model Advice, the claim "UK's Premier Modelling Advice Service" would be likely to be understood by consumers to be an expression of the advertiser’s opinion of the quality of their advice, and therefore to be a subjective claim that was not capable of substantiation. We therefore concluded the claim was not misleading.
On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code 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) but did not find it in breach.
2. & 3. Not upheld
We noted that the logos were displayed on Model Advice’s website to support a BIS campaign around worker’s rights, and that BIS had encouraged them to display those logos. We also noted that the logos were displayed under the text “Working with ...”, which we considered made clear that Model Advice was working with those organisations, rather than that they specifically endorsed the advertiser’s business. Because we understood that Model Advice was working with BIS and Directgov to promote BIS’ campaign, and they had permission to use the logos of those organisations, we concluded the ad did not breach the Code.
On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code 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 3.50 3.50 Marketing communications must not display a trust mark, quality mark or equivalent without the necessary authorisation. Marketing communications must not claim that the marketer (or any other entity referred to), the marketing communication or the advertised product has been approved, endorsed or authorised by any public or other body if it has not or without complying with the terms of the approval, endorsement or authorisation. (Endorsements and Testimonials), but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
