Slashdot Mirror

(2) Advertising is likely to be considered misleading if, for example, it contains a false statement, description, illustration or claim about a material fact or characteristic. Material characteristics include price, availability and performance. Any ambiguity which might give a misleading impression must be avoided.

(3) Even if everything stated is literally true, an advertisement may still mislead if it conceals significant facts or creates a false impression of relevant aspects of the product or service.

(4) Scientific terms or jargon, statistics and other technical information should not be used to make claims appear to have a scientific basis that they do not possess. Equally, statistics of limited validity must not be presented in such a way as to mislead, for instance by implying that they are universally true.

(5) An advertisement may be misleading even if it does not directly lead to financial loss or a misguided purchasing decision. The ITC may also regard an advertisement as misleading if, for example, it causes viewers to waste their time making enquiries, only to find that offers are unavailable or that there are important limitations. This could involve encouraging viewers to visit shops, or to make lengthy telephone calls (including freephone calls).

(6) When assessing whether an advertisement is misleading, the ITC considers the overall impression likely to be conveyed to a reasonable viewer. It does not consider the intentions of the advertiser, nor simply whether the advertising meets legal or other regulatory requirements.

(2) Advertising is likely to be considered misleading if, for example, it contains a false statement, description, illustration or claim about a material fact or characteristic. Material characteristics include price, availability and performance. Any ambiguity which might give a misleading impression must be avoided.

(3) Even if everything stated is literally true, an advertisement may still mislead if it conceals significant facts or creates a false impression of relevant aspects of the product or service.

(4) Scientific terms or jargon, statistics and other technical information should not be used to make claims appear to have a scientific basis that they do not possess. Equally, statistics of limited validity must not be presented in such a way as to mislead, for instance by implying that they are universally true.

(5) An advertisement may be misleading even if it does not directly lead to financial loss or a misguided purchasing decision. The ITC may also regard an advertisement as misleading if, for example, it causes viewers to waste their time making enquiries, only to find that offers are unavailable or that there are important limitations. This could involve encouraging viewers to visit shops, or to make lengthy telephone calls (including freephone calls).

(6) When assessing whether an advertisement is misleading, the ITC considers the overall impression likely to be conveyed to a reasonable viewer. It does not consider the intentions of the advertiser, nor simply whether the advertising meets legal or other regulatory requirements.

Probably all 8 of them.

Yes, for those who didn't RTFA, the ad was yanked on the basis of 8 complaints. Read the complaint report. Why don't we get 10 people to complain about those Intel ads that said the Pentium makes the internet faster? What a load of shit.

According to the report on their website, it was "offensive, shocking and in bad taste."

issuing licences that allow commercial television companies to broadcast analogue and digital services in and from the UK, whether the services are received by aerial, dish or cable;

How can they issue licences if there is not a law requiring that you must have one to broadcast?

It may not directly say that it is government, but it is.

British Airways - "The worlds favorite airline". Right, everyone in the world just loves British Air, especially for the cuisine. That's why Lufthansa gets such a bad rap.

Four complaints were made about that advert (one from a competitor, but the ITC found in favour of BA, as there was an argument for saying it was true in international flights.

The ITC will only act over claims in adverts that a reasonable person could consider to be a statement of fact, rather than just a slogan. So saying "The best personal computer in the world" is OK, but saying it's the fastest implies a statement presented as fact that can be objectively disproven, and therefore is not allowed. These laws are in place to protect the consumer - otherwise Mcdonalds could advertise their burgers as "healthy and fat free".

Why is it that some government agency can say what some broadcaster puts on the air.

The ITC is not a government agency. From the ITC website:

As our name suggests, we're independent of the Government and of the broadcasters. We are funded by fees from our licensees, of which there are around 300 who between them hold nearly 600 licences.

When an advertisement lies, at least in the US, you have the right to sue for false advertisement.

In the UK, as you would expect, if you have been wronged in the eyes of the law you can sue. If you don't like the ITC's decision and you have good grounds, sue. We do however try to avoid the US disease of the lawsuit culture.

Wait a second, they are all controled by the ITC.

Half right. All commerical stations are controlled by the ITC. The BBC is self-regulating.

As our name suggests, we're independent of the Government and of the broadcasters. We are funded by fees from our licensees, of which there are around 300 who between them hold nearly 600 licences.

The parent is completely correct.


See the Sponsorship code.

I love the ITC. They're heartless bastards who don't let shit slip past their fingers.

In the UK, the ITC regulate advertising on TV, amongst other things. Does the US not have an equivalent?

You can find out about the UK's digital transmitters here.

Of course, DVB is just an output format.. DTT (digital terrestrial tv) is a way of delivering DVB).

The Radio Authority licenses commercial radio broadcasts in the UK.
The Radiocommuniactions Agency is "responsible for the management of the non-military radio spectrum in the UK."
At some point this year both jobs are due to be taken over by the new OFCOM, which will also take on the roles currently performed by OFTEL, the Broadcasting Standards Commission, and the Independent Television Commission (see their sites for what they do.)

Most people can receive 5 channels via aerial, approx. 30 using a freeview digital decoder. Sky via satellite delivers more channels than I care to remember and my cable service delivers practically the same only by cable (with cable modem :) )

Your link is to an entirely irrelevant page about advertising on commercial channels, which mentions the 9pm watershed only in passing.

This is a link to a relevant page about the BBC's policy on family viewing and the 9pm "watershed," while this is the equivalent from the ITC.

Your link is to an entirely irrelevant page about advertising on commercial channels, which mentions the 9pm watershed only in passing.

This is a link to a relevant page about the BBC's policy on family viewing and the 9pm "watershed," while this is the equivalent from the ITC.

The article uses the term "post-watershed" which apparently refers to programs broadcast after 9pm in the UK.
This is a page with relevant legal regulations that are implicated...
Hope that clears up any confusion.

But there is a ground swell movement from the broadcasters to try and ... influence the current regs.

UK TV advertising is in the (relative) doldrums at the moment, and their worried.

If by "regulation" you mean content control, Sky are (and have always been) regulated by the Independent Television Commission. While it is true to say that the satellites are run from Luxembourg (by SES-Astra), Sky rents space on the transponders and is UK-based in order to be able to run its subscription service (with their main call centre being in Livingston, Scotland if I remember rightly).

ONdigital had to meet targets for subtitling, they had to do regional and sub-regional broadcasts

If you mean regional news channels, Sky does those as well. Not being a subscriber, I cannot comment on subtitling but its cost should be quite small compared to the programming cost (you can do with only one person and relatively straightforward equipment).

OnDigital's failure has been mostly ascribed to a single, naively-negotiated contract for footballing rights, for which they paid an amount they could not afford. I would also suggest that their consumer approach (where you could only *rent* a box with a full-channel subscription rather than buy one to sample the free channels) was flawed. The new regime with Freeview seems more promising with no subscription needed, and cheaper (£99) set-top boxes.

The problem here is that UK (and Europe) satellite broadcasting has been a 'natural' monopoly due to the very high entry costs, plus competing brings the extra costs of a "bidding war" for film rights (this was a major reason for British Satellite Broadcasting's "merger" with Sky in 1990 as well as the demise of u>direct, an independent film channel broadcasting on the Sky platform). For Europe, replace Sky with Canal (in its various incarnations).

Despite this monopoly, Sky is still making a loss (football rights plus the subsidy on supplying free Digiboxes to new subscribers) and I believe that Canal has only recently started to show a profit.

Wandering back on top, for de-regulation it is not what you do but how you do it that is the key issue. It can only be beneficial if the consumer has control, and that means having the opportunity to make a choice and the information to make a "good" choice. The de-regulation of the financial industry in the UK during the 1980s gave people a wider choice for pensions, savings policies and loans but, because of the complexity and lack of independent information, unscrupulous and dishonest salesmen were able to "sell" (ie in many cases lie about) inappropriate and unnecessary products resulting in a multi-billion pound misselling scandal. Enron paupers, you are not alone...

Therefore a 30 or 60 minute program will have ads every 15 minutes including before the next program.

There is a maximum of 12 minutes of ads (excluding self-promotion) per hour, and 7 or 9 minutes maximum average per day. Unsurprisingly therefore, overnight shows have no or hardly any commericals, and just serve the purpose of allowing more ads to be shown during the day.

The ITC (Independant Television Commission) advertising regulations can be found here.

• redefinition of the remit in relation to all channels, not just ITV, and further commitment to innovation and experiment;
  
• a revised and strengthened statement on education;
  
• a commitment to provide at least three hours on average per week of multicultural programmes, and also to schedule at least some of these in peak time;
  
• a major commitment to the UK film industry, giving some preference to innovative and risky subjects and treatments;
  
• a new commitment to programmes for and about people with disabilities;
  
• increased requirement of 60 per cent of programmes specially commissioned for the Channel by 1999;
  
• a new commitment for production outside the London region, including a minimum requirement of 30 per cent by 2002;
  
• new maxima for repeats;
  
• a new commitment and new minimum requirement for spending on training;
  
• a new requirement for diversity in the peak-time schedule, including news, current affairs, educational, religious and multicultural programmes;
  
• revised commitments to subtitling and other provisions for those with hearing and sight impairments.
  

• redefinition of the remit in relation to all channels, not just ITV, and further commitment to innovation and experiment;
  
• a revised and strengthened statement on education;
  
• a commitment to provide at least three hours on average per week of multicultural programmes, and also to schedule at least some of these in peak time;
  
• a major commitment to the UK film industry, giving some preference to innovative and risky subjects and treatments;
  
• a new commitment to programmes for and about people with disabilities;
  
• increased requirement of 60 per cent of programmes specially commissioned for the Channel by 1999;
  
• a new commitment for production outside the London region, including a minimum requirement of 30 per cent by 2002;
  
• new maxima for repeats;
  
• a new commitment and new minimum requirement for spending on training;
  
• a new requirement for diversity in the peak-time schedule, including news, current affairs, educational, religious and multicultural programmes;
  
• revised commitments to subtitling and other provisions for those with hearing and sight impairments.