Rules without rulers.

I found this interesting:

ASA - British Sky Broadcasting Ltd t/a Sky

Mainly because, amongst all the rest, of this: '...We understood that there was no generally accepted definition of carbon neutral but that the claim could be evaluated against generally accepted best practice. '

Might it not be a plan for consumers to have one... that makes sense.. and they can trust?

For now, that term means diddly squat to me and washes over like sensible enviro policies on a Government Minister.

I'm also gathering, from look at other judgements, that being told not to run an already expended campaign again is hardly the greatest motivating penalty to not repeat again. POOR Show.