Watchdog Slams BT

The UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld two complaints over "misleading" press (newspaper, magazines etc.) adverts for BT Retail's latest superfast 'up to' 40Mbps BT-Infinity service, both of which centred around the services limited availability.

Both of the upheld complaints focused on the service's "limited coverage", which did not appear to have been correctly reflected. In particular the claim that "most of our customers are already seeing at least three times faster speeds" appeared to suggest that the service was widely available, even though it wasn't

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

Both of the upheld complaints focused on the service's "limited coverage", which did not appear to have been correctly reflected. In particular the claim that "most of our customers are already seeing at least three times faster speeds" appeared to suggest that the service was widely available, even though it wasn't

Hmmm. If that referred to BT's Infinity product then I don't see the problem as stated. Why should a comment about what BT Infinity customers get be taken as a comment about BT Infinity availability?

http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2011/...

Oddly it is Virgin complaining about BT, i..e think both firms have people who watch the others adverts and complain if the slightest hint of mis-intrepretation is possible.

Not seen the press ad's so cannot comment on how clear or not the font sizes were to see if most people would have noticed clarification parts.

Given up with the tit for tat ASA stuff in our news.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2011/...

Oddly it is Virgin complaining about BT, i..e think both firms have people who watch the others adverts and complain if the slightest hint of mis-intrepretation is possible.

Not seen the press ad's so cannot comment on how clear or not the font sizes were to see if most people would have noticed clarification parts.

Given up with the tit for tat ASA stuff in our news.

Yeah, another questionable adjudication in my view.

But BT's adverts are everywhere, seen by everyone yet availability is very limited.

It's right that this complaint was upheld.

VM don't advertise as being available everywhere ... unless advertising their national ADSL service. There's a big difference and any way more people can get 50Mbps from VM than can get 40Mbps from BT.

Are you saying VM have never advertised in the national press, which is where these adverts were?

The availability was covered in the advert, and at no point did BT say available everywhere.

VM send their junk mail to me advertising their service, but I cannot get it.

Based on the way the ASA has upheld point b, I would suggest that the ASA need to understand the English language. The statements on the advert quite clear and BT ensure that they gave the basis of their claim.

I too am getting fed up with VM continually complaining about BTs adverts - it reminds me of the 1990s when Virgin Atlantic was always complaining about BAs tactics.

No that's not what I'm saying.

Not exactly but VM cable is only available on cabled streets, that's usually clear. Although to be fair VM's adverts are very misleading as well with them claiming it is Fibre Optic.

I used to get advertising for VM in my letter box, that's stopped now after I called and explained that there is no cable here and I would never take their national ADSL broadband.

Problem is adverts need to be moderated before thay are published as the 'damage' is already done before the complaints are made. BT and anyone else can say whatever they want in an advert until someone complains.

In reply to a post by 5km:

Problem is adverts need to be moderated before thay are published as the 'damage' is already done before the complaints are made. BT and anyone else can say whatever they want in an advert until someone complains.

Nah, people just need to understand that adverts are not to be trusted. Of course they exaggerate the good points and of course they gloss over or neglect mention the bad points. Sure we need regulation to stop it getting totally out of hand but the way to deal with adverts is to start from the assumption that they are all lying. Oh and it's worth reading The Space Merchants

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Space_Merchants

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

and at no point did BT say available everywhere.

Exactly

Many of these adverts are on local web sites serving small local communities that have no access to Virgin Cable or BT Infinity.

I understand why these web sites accept Virgin's and BT's money, but why would Virgin and BT advertise products to communities they do not serve?

Have you checked, the sites may well actually be just serving up Google ads, or the site is part of a much larger group (e.g. many local papers)

Virgin complaining about BT regarding a misleading advert?

How about BT complain about Virgin claiming they say their products are 'Fibre Optic' when they are actually not (Virgin have been advertising it as Fibre Optic for ages).

It's like if BT started advertising their ADSL products as Fibre Optic all because the exchange is connected to the internet via fibre.

Ridiculous! Maybe Virgin should spend more time deploying their network to new locations than trying to complain about BT's adverts.

Oh and... I seen hundreds of cases where properties have been unable to get Virgins' Broadband, even though (For instance) the houses across the street can.

BT didn't, in anywhere in the advert, say that Infinity is available everywhere!

Virgin need to pull their act together.

Edited by chris6273 (Wed 21-Sep-11 20:00:36)

In reply to a post by MHC:

it reminds me of the 1990s when Virgin Atlantic was always complaining about BAs tactics.

That was decided in the courts I believe.

This is a bit different, but yes, very irritating.

I get tons of VM junk mail too. :-/