1. Mattjimf

    ASA remit

    There's been a bit of a hoo-haa going on today with the ASA upholding a complaint about swearing on the website of Brewdog - http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2013/7/BrewDog-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_231183.aspx

    The ruling is upheld under marketing rules, but following on from the ruling means that all websites are marketing and as such are governed by the ASA, unless I'm reading it wrong. If I'm not reading it wrong, does that then mean I can complain about the Daily Mail website for just about everything on it?

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: ASA remit

      It's self regulation: link to CAP website. An interesting little set-up. I can see where Lord Leveson looked for some of his ideas on press regulation, as well as some similarities with the old (discredited) press regulation systems.

      It looks like the ultimate sanction is having your right to advertise taken away or at least severely curtailed. Mostly companies just get told not to run the ad again. But if you persistently offend they can get the advertising networks to refuse to take your ads (as they have a duty to make reasonable efforts not to air stuff that breaks the code). After repeated tellings off they can make you have all your ads pre-checked for compliance, backed by the same threat (as happened to FCUK a while back - the company what can't spell fuck). I'd imagine it's after that you get the plug pulled. If the advertising space sellers don't co-operate, and it makes enough noise, they might get full regulation, so they've an incentive to cooperate. Plus the ASA can refer to the OFT who can go to court, so there is a legal backstop.

      Of course it's still self-regulation. It applies to pretty much all advertising, and marketing / sales promotions. Although it says that where things are unclear they will have a bias towards ruling on paid-for advertising space, which I guess means they'd be less likely to rule on a company's own website.

      Anyway Brewdog could probably ignore it. This is self regulation. If the ASA felt sufficiently pissed off, they could ban them from mainstream advertising providers. If they don't market using those channels, then they might not care. I suspect they'd have to be a lot naughtier than this in order to get any serious sanctions - they're not high profile.

      As for the Daily Fail, the code applies to advertising, marketing and sales campaigns. I'm sure their online ads are regulated, the same as the ones that go in the paper - and will mostly comply. The ASA don't have jurisdiction over the articles.

      Although they do have the power to rule on 'advertorial' type content. Which could be interesting, given that 90% of the travel and fashion plus half the technology coverage in papers seems to be barely more than thinly disguised adverts.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon