The Richard Desmond/Peter Hill rag breached the rules, again, with this front page on 24 October 2009:
The problem? The 'free fireworks' were not 'for every reader' as the offer didn't apply in Northern Ireland.
Moreover, the tiny text written vertically down the right-hand side of the box said:
When you spend £15 at participating Sainsbury's stores
But only on page 31 did it make clear the £15 had to spent on fireworks.
In both instances, the ASA ruled the front page of the Express was misleading. Now there's a surprise.
The ruling?
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
Brilliant. As a one-off offer from four months ago, it wasn't going to appear again anyway.
So it seems the ASA is about as firm and relevant as the PCC when it comes to upholding complaints.
Posts
That's why the Express (and most of the other papers) don't give a flying fuck what the ASA says. They hold it in about as much respect as, let's see, the PCC!
ReplyDeleteWhich is what you said. Damn.
ReplyDeleteThe ASA is really just acting a shield against prosecution in a case like this. A private individual would be charged with fraud.
ReplyDeleteImagine if the ASA or PCC were judges in criminal court: "You have been found guilty of murder. As punishment, you must agree not to murder that person again in the same way. You may now go free."
ReplyDeleteWhat a great analogy, I like it
ReplyDelete