Background

Summary of Council decision:

Two issues were investigated, both of which were Not upheld.

Ad description

A poster ad for TalkTalk’s fibre broadband services, seen in September 2017, included an image of two women using a tablet, with text superimposed over the image stating “Girl time. It matters. Endless entertainment on the same fibre cables as BT & Sky, for less”. At the bottom of the poster, the ad included a roundel which stated “Britain’s best value fixed price fibre” and small print which stated “TalkTalk Faster Fibre with speed boost up to 76 Mb at £31.50 p/m for 24 months versus BT Unlimited Infinity 1 up to 52 Mb at £34.99 p/m for 12 months - £49.99 p/m thereafter (plus £150 BT reward)”.

Issue

1. BT, who noted that TalkTalk’s lowest headline speed on the referenced fibre cables was ‘up to 38MB’, while BT’s lowest headline speed was ‘up to 52MB’, challenged whether the claim “Endless entertainment on the same fibre cables as BT & Sky, for less” was misleading by failing to make the difference sufficiently clear; and

2. BT, who also understood that their service included a stronger wi-fi signal strength and would therefore provide a better connection for wireless devices, challenged whether the image of two women using wireless devices and the claim “the same fibre cables” misleadingly implied that the overall service, including the end service on wireless devices, was the same.

Response

1. TalkTalk responded that at the time the ad was displayed, they offered an ‘up to’ 38 Mb service and a more expensive ‘up to’ 76 Mb service priced at £31.50 per month. BT’s cheapest fibre service was ‘up to’ 52 Mb for £34.99 per month, and Sky’s was an ‘up to’ 38 Mb service for £33.99 per month. They told us that the qualification at the bottom of the ad made clear which products were being compared and that all three services made use of Openreach’s fibre cables.

2. TalkTalk did not agree that the picture of the women holding the tablet suggested that the entire end-to-end service, including wi-fi signal strength, was the same. They explained that the ad did not contain a picture of a router or any suggestion of how close the women in the picture were to the router and that the picture, alongside the claim “the same fibre cables” did not indicate that the wi-fi signal of the routers was being compared.

Assessment

1. Not upheld

The ASA considered that consumers would understand the claim “Endless entertainment on the same fibre cables as BT & Sky, for less” alongside a roundel at the bottom-left which said, “Britain’s best value fixed price fibre” to mean that TalkTalk were offering a generally comparable broadband service for a cheaper price than those offered by BT and Sky. Although we noted that BT’s cheapest product was faster than TalkTalk’s, we also noted that TalkTalk’s main products, which were 38 Mb and 76 Mb products, were both cheaper than their BT equivalent. Because that was the case, we therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.  and  3.3 3.3 Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the  medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
 (Misleading advertising),  3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify.  and  3.10 3.10 Qualifications must be presented clearly.
CAP has published a Help Note on Claims that Require Qualification.
 (Qualification),  3.33 3.33 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an identifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer about either the advertised product or the competing product.  (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) and  3.39 3.39 Marketing communications that include a price comparison must make the basis of the comparison clear.
CAP has published a Help Note on Retailers' Price Comparisons and a Help Note on Lowest Price Claims and Price Promises.
 (Price comparisons), but did not find it in breach.

2. Not upheld

We acknowledged that the ad depicted two women using mobile devices and that the claim “… the same fibre cables …” did not refer to a specific part of the service. We considered that although the router did contribute to the overall delivery of the broadband service, there were a number of other factors that also contributed to the service. We did not consider that because consumers were using mobile devices this specifically highlighted the router. We noted that the ad specifically referenced price in the roundel at the bottom of the poster and that consumers would understand that this was the main point of comparison that TalkTalk were making. We therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.  and  3.3 3.3 Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the  medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
 (Misleading advertising),  3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify.  and  3.10 3.10 Qualifications must be presented clearly.
CAP has published a Help Note on Claims that Require Qualification.
 (Qualification),  3.33 3.33 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an identifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer about either the advertised product or the competing product.  (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) and  3.39 3.39 Marketing communications that include a price comparison must make the basis of the comparison clear.
CAP has published a Help Note on Retailers' Price Comparisons and a Help Note on Lowest Price Claims and Price Promises.
 (Price comparisons), but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.10     3.3     3.33     3.39     3.9    


More on