You know those A5 sales flyers for gizmos you can get?
Most headlines propose an absolute claim but sort of get out of a challenge by making it a question: 'Could this be the best electric toenail buffer in the world?'.
I was minded of this when I read an ASA ruling on a topic I am interested in, namely regrading solar and the claims made by manufacturers.
As one still considering solar, though dubious about the efficiency and hence payback period in our climate, I am not sure I am too encouraged by what the consumer is left with here.
FWIW, I have looked at my exploding collection of packaging junkk and have in mind a S/SW wall structure made out of them by way of a solar experiment. Watch this space.
Showing posts with label ASA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ASA. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
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.
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.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
CATEGORY - Advertising & Resources
A lot of 'eco' involves advertising, so I thought I'd kick off a category of some useful links in this regard.
Can't hurt, eh?
ASA Adjudications - though it is worth bearing in mind that in most cases where found against, the ad is long gone and the whole thing is more of a wrist slap.
AirportWatch - shows how over-egging can undermine
AMEC plc t/a AMEC Wind Energy - it was cleared, but I share just to show how complex the issues are.
Renault (UK) Ltd - how many 'eco-logos' are there are now?
__________
RESOURCES
brand republic - gateway to several other 'republics': creative, design , media, retail. Sends out daily updates
Creative Bulletin - TVC links, etc
Gorkana - PR & journalist exchange
Indy - NEW - 'Best in show' Featured ads
journalisted.com - Track down who wrote/writes what... well useful!
mad.co.uk-
marketingweek -
utalkmarketing.com -
utalkmarketing.com - creative showcase
thinkbox.tv - tv commercial archive
veryfunnyads - NEW - Tin. Does. Says. What.
________
NEWS
Mad - UK marketers form green alliance - Sure it will help.
I'll add 'em as I find 'em. Or get told. It's good to share.
Can't hurt, eh?
ASA Adjudications - though it is worth bearing in mind that in most cases where found against, the ad is long gone and the whole thing is more of a wrist slap.
AirportWatch - shows how over-egging can undermine
AMEC plc t/a AMEC Wind Energy - it was cleared, but I share just to show how complex the issues are.
Renault (UK) Ltd - how many 'eco-logos' are there are now?
__________
RESOURCES
brand republic - gateway to several other 'republics': creative, design , media, retail. Sends out daily updates
Creative Bulletin - TVC links, etc
Gorkana - PR & journalist exchange
Indy - NEW - 'Best in show' Featured ads
journalisted.com - Track down who wrote/writes what... well useful!
mad.co.uk-
marketingweek -
utalkmarketing.com -
utalkmarketing.com - creative showcase
thinkbox.tv - tv commercial archive
veryfunnyads - NEW - Tin. Does. Says. What.
________
NEWS
Mad - UK marketers form green alliance - Sure it will help.
I'll add 'em as I find 'em. Or get told. It's good to share.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Not the first, and certainly not the last
Here's another in the long line of consumer adverts (19 so far this year) that has been found to have breached the ASA's environmental code as reported by the Guardian.
Boeing used figures that assumed that their new super jumbo (the 747-8 Intercontinental) was flying at 100% capacity, the UK rules state that CO2 emissions for aircraft should be calculated using the figure of a standard 79.7% capacity.
At the rate that adverts eulogising most businesses 'green' products are starting to appear, I reckon the ASA is going to become rather busy over the next couple of years.
______________________
There's also a nice little commentary by Leo Hickman on the same subject in yesterday's Guardian Blogs.
Boeing used figures that assumed that their new super jumbo (the 747-8 Intercontinental) was flying at 100% capacity, the UK rules state that CO2 emissions for aircraft should be calculated using the figure of a standard 79.7% capacity.
At the rate that adverts eulogising most businesses 'green' products are starting to appear, I reckon the ASA is going to become rather busy over the next couple of years.
______________________
There's also a nice little commentary by Leo Hickman on the same subject in yesterday's Guardian Blogs.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Cynical... nous?
Toothless ASA
Who is not aware of ad campaigns that had the realities of such as the ASA's procedures factored into the production shedules?
I was recently told of one guerilla ad/marketing/PR coordinated 'launch' that involved doing something designed to:
a) Get complained about (PR)
b) If that doesn't work naturally, make sure it does via a tame Daily Mail reporter
c) Make a fuss about being complained about (more PR)
d) Concede (even more PR)
e) Make a fuss of the compromise (yeah, you guessed it)
f) Try and score a puff peice in the Sunday's about how it all happened (yawn)
Did I miss anything?
It's often worth looking at just how large the print run is as this can still involve a cost disincentive if it is a full national.
Digital means so much can be a one off that is easily, and cheaply sacrificed.
Are they still eligible for awards if pulled?
ASA gets tough on advertising green claims
Climate Change Corp - Public gets wise to ‘greenwashing’
Wise yes, but still poorly served in making good decisions. And the current situation serves the overall cause of better environmental practice and behaviours poorly.
You have kindly added, in the form of the 'FTSE 100 greenwashers and greenwinners' survey, yet another interesting if rather meaningless effort to muddy already murky waters.
At least M&S is at the top of this one, as it was in another I had, but yet another had Tesco tops. Three in one week. What's a consumer to do?
Probably, and I'm just guessing here, ignore the whole lot. Which makes them very expensive exercises in a thriving and lucrative comms industry that has little to DO with actually making much difference on the ground with the majority of individuals who matter.
Who is not aware of ad campaigns that had the realities of such as the ASA's procedures factored into the production shedules?
I was recently told of one guerilla ad/marketing/PR coordinated 'launch' that involved doing something designed to:
a) Get complained about (PR)
b) If that doesn't work naturally, make sure it does via a tame Daily Mail reporter
c) Make a fuss about being complained about (more PR)
d) Concede (even more PR)
e) Make a fuss of the compromise (yeah, you guessed it)
f) Try and score a puff peice in the Sunday's about how it all happened (yawn)
Did I miss anything?
It's often worth looking at just how large the print run is as this can still involve a cost disincentive if it is a full national.
Digital means so much can be a one off that is easily, and cheaply sacrificed.
Are they still eligible for awards if pulled?
ASA gets tough on advertising green claims
Climate Change Corp - Public gets wise to ‘greenwashing’
Wise yes, but still poorly served in making good decisions. And the current situation serves the overall cause of better environmental practice and behaviours poorly.
You have kindly added, in the form of the 'FTSE 100 greenwashers and greenwinners' survey, yet another interesting if rather meaningless effort to muddy already murky waters.
At least M&S is at the top of this one, as it was in another I had, but yet another had Tesco tops. Three in one week. What's a consumer to do?
Probably, and I'm just guessing here, ignore the whole lot. Which makes them very expensive exercises in a thriving and lucrative comms industry that has little to DO with actually making much difference on the ground with the majority of individuals who matter.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Trust me, I'm in (green) advertising
'False' green ad complaints rise
I cannot for the life of me understand why it gets done or what is in the heads of those who think they can get away with it.,
Do they not realise that by creating a near automatic aura of doubt on anything conveying a green message by such actions, far from leading us (the public, authorities and commercial world) towards a mutually rewarding era of environmentally (and financially) rewarding relationships, these cynical efforts are simply making it more difficult and stealing time that is already precious to effect changes in public behaviour?
There are clear guidelines out there, but a weekly read of the ASA adjudications makes depressing reading as to the motives and/or competence of those involved.
I'm not big on negativity, but I'm seriously thinking of creating a 'wall of sLime' on Junkk.com where these examples get hung up for all to see, along with the names of those involved in their creation.
Joel Makover - The Greening of P.R.: Read All About It
'The world of public relations has discovered green with a vengeance, and the big global firms seem locked, loaded, and ready to fire up their drum beating.'
Consider a just-released survey by Ipsos Reid, which found that "Consumers appear to be wary of companies who label their products as being 'green', or environmentally friendly." The study found that seven in ten (70%) Americans either "strongly" (12%) or "somewhat" agree (58%) that "when companies call a product 'green' (meaning better for the environment), it is usually just a marketing tactic."
These P.R. firms will have their work cut out for them.
I'm not the only one with a watching brief, it seems.
ASA
Indy - Innocent found guilty of making false health claims - Why on earth would they do it? Great product. Great brand. Great reputation. But then they have grown to a size where there are scores of levels of munchkins vying for their place in the corporate pie. I had high hopes of getting something meaningful going with both Junkk.com and RE:tie vis a vis their commitment to re-everything, but hit a wall of trendy young things in the 'marketing' dept. who seemed unable to take a message let alone pass it on. Sad.
Brand republic - Smoothies ad pulled up over detox claims
Guardian - Innocent found guilty over smoothie health claims - well, there's no such thing as ...
Indy - Can you not know that you are using forced labour? - Not really my usual cuppa this guy, but he kinda nails it. And OK, it isn't really right for this post, either.
Mad - Lost innocence
I think all it does is show how size can create all sorts of problems.
It is hard to imagine that in leaner times those running the show would not be on top of such things. But now there will be layer upon layer of departmental munchkins (just try getting past the bananaphone to talk to a sensible decision maker without getting all sorts of folk running turf interference these days) jockeying to make their mark, so such things creep in.
As to the McDonalds hook up... what is the problem? Surely getting something healthy...ier in there is better than nothing? And if one is of a campaigning bent, better to work from within than standing outside shouting all or nothing impracticalities. And who, beyond the media, are these excitable folk who can get so turned off by such commercial decisions? I felt the same way over the hoo-haa that Anita Roddick had flogged off Body Shop. It was hers to do with as she felt. And if feeling generous (if change was her aim) was the risk of comprising the Body Shop brand not worth elevated the aspirations of the parent ?
Mind you, it can create some fun. I suspect those who bought out Ben & Jerry's haven't a clue what is going on sometimes: link
Brand Republic - NOT SO INNOCENT
I was going to post but it was more question so forgive me taking the more direct route.
Having had a rather frustrating time of late with innocent (there are aspects of our businesses that suggest(ed) synergy), which I have pretty much identified with their growth curve out-stripping their original (and, I believe, sincerely held) stated desire to not be like the rest, your comment resonated.
However, as I blogged (link above), I laid this more at the door corporate B*****cks and gatekeeper culture. But you seem to be suggesting that there is something more predictable than even this. You would not have written what you did had you not believed it, but I must say I am surprised that marketing gurus, much less those whose hunger has pushed them to darker places, could simply feel the risk of such a strategy could be worth it.
Look how much damage this one small thing has created for the brand, versus what minute % increase they may have generated overstated the benefits of this product.
I truly hope you are wrong. But fear you may be right.
Guardian - Hot air
I'm holding my breath.
Just as a precaution, mind.
I cannot for the life of me understand why it gets done or what is in the heads of those who think they can get away with it.,
Do they not realise that by creating a near automatic aura of doubt on anything conveying a green message by such actions, far from leading us (the public, authorities and commercial world) towards a mutually rewarding era of environmentally (and financially) rewarding relationships, these cynical efforts are simply making it more difficult and stealing time that is already precious to effect changes in public behaviour?
There are clear guidelines out there, but a weekly read of the ASA adjudications makes depressing reading as to the motives and/or competence of those involved.
I'm not big on negativity, but I'm seriously thinking of creating a 'wall of sLime' on Junkk.com where these examples get hung up for all to see, along with the names of those involved in their creation.
Joel Makover - The Greening of P.R.: Read All About It
'The world of public relations has discovered green with a vengeance, and the big global firms seem locked, loaded, and ready to fire up their drum beating.'
Consider a just-released survey by Ipsos Reid, which found that "Consumers appear to be wary of companies who label their products as being 'green', or environmentally friendly." The study found that seven in ten (70%) Americans either "strongly" (12%) or "somewhat" agree (58%) that "when companies call a product 'green' (meaning better for the environment), it is usually just a marketing tactic."
These P.R. firms will have their work cut out for them.
I'm not the only one with a watching brief, it seems.
ASA
Indy - Innocent found guilty of making false health claims - Why on earth would they do it? Great product. Great brand. Great reputation. But then they have grown to a size where there are scores of levels of munchkins vying for their place in the corporate pie. I had high hopes of getting something meaningful going with both Junkk.com and RE:tie vis a vis their commitment to re-everything, but hit a wall of trendy young things in the 'marketing' dept. who seemed unable to take a message let alone pass it on. Sad.
Brand republic - Smoothies ad pulled up over detox claims
Guardian - Innocent found guilty over smoothie health claims - well, there's no such thing as ...
Indy - Can you not know that you are using forced labour? - Not really my usual cuppa this guy, but he kinda nails it. And OK, it isn't really right for this post, either.
Mad - Lost innocence
I think all it does is show how size can create all sorts of problems.
It is hard to imagine that in leaner times those running the show would not be on top of such things. But now there will be layer upon layer of departmental munchkins (just try getting past the bananaphone to talk to a sensible decision maker without getting all sorts of folk running turf interference these days) jockeying to make their mark, so such things creep in.
As to the McDonalds hook up... what is the problem? Surely getting something healthy...ier in there is better than nothing? And if one is of a campaigning bent, better to work from within than standing outside shouting all or nothing impracticalities. And who, beyond the media, are these excitable folk who can get so turned off by such commercial decisions? I felt the same way over the hoo-haa that Anita Roddick had flogged off Body Shop. It was hers to do with as she felt. And if feeling generous (if change was her aim) was the risk of comprising the Body Shop brand not worth elevated the aspirations of the parent ?
Mind you, it can create some fun. I suspect those who bought out Ben & Jerry's haven't a clue what is going on sometimes: link
Brand Republic - NOT SO INNOCENT
I was going to post but it was more question so forgive me taking the more direct route.
Having had a rather frustrating time of late with innocent (there are aspects of our businesses that suggest(ed) synergy), which I have pretty much identified with their growth curve out-stripping their original (and, I believe, sincerely held) stated desire to not be like the rest, your comment resonated.
However, as I blogged (link above), I laid this more at the door corporate B*****cks and gatekeeper culture. But you seem to be suggesting that there is something more predictable than even this. You would not have written what you did had you not believed it, but I must say I am surprised that marketing gurus, much less those whose hunger has pushed them to darker places, could simply feel the risk of such a strategy could be worth it.
Look how much damage this one small thing has created for the brand, versus what minute % increase they may have generated overstated the benefits of this product.
I truly hope you are wrong. But fear you may be right.
Guardian - Hot air
I'm holding my breath.
Just as a precaution, mind.
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Legal, decent, honest... and evasive?
I get these all the time, and have at last decided to have a scope.
As an ad man and enviro-concerned person, I found this one of interest, especially with my concerns on financial vs. enviROI.
To do it justice I will need to read it carefully, but I have to say that if I am not sure what was going on at the outset, I'd have to err on the side of caution.
As an ad man and enviro-concerned person, I found this one of interest, especially with my concerns on financial vs. enviROI.
To do it justice I will need to read it carefully, but I have to say that if I am not sure what was going on at the outset, I'd have to err on the side of caution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)