Campaign to get the other misleading iPhone ad "Everyone" banned in the UK

[sibruk]

Following the excellent result yesterday with the iPhone "Every part of the internet" advert being banned in the UK by the Advertising Standards Authority, it prompted me to finally sit down and make the complaint I have been bitching about and intending to make for the last four weeks.

If any of you have seen the iPhone "Everyone" advert, you cannot fail to recognise that the user experience depicted on the iPhone is absolutely nothing like reality. I wish my iPhone was even half as fast at rendering web pages, receiving email attachments and getting a GPS lock when I'm out and about. I even get excellent 3G speeds (~1.8-2.0 Mbps on O2 where I live at most times) and yet I don't even recognise the way they are portraying the iPhone on 3G in that advert.

So I have made my complaint (the online form is available here if you want to do the same) and feel free to pillage my own complaint (below) as much or as little as you like.

The iPhone "Everyone" advert depicts the new iPhone 3G device, running version 2 of the iPhone OS. The voiceover repeatedly states that "people will like" to do lots of different things "really fast".

The advert shows a graphics-heavy website loading in under 1 second on the 3G cellular network. In reality, this page could never load that fast on a WiFi connection, let alone the theoretical maximum data speed of a 3G connection on O2. Next, an email attachment is shown downloading - 338 KB in under 2 seconds. And finally the iPhone's GPS capabilities are shown to locate the iPhone and pull back a map over the 3G network in under 1 second.

The advert is extremely misleading in showing what the iPhone is capable of doing, especially when laid against a repeating voice over of "really fast" and when shown to be on the cellular network.

Not only are the 3G speeds shown entirely impossible to achieve, but the iPhone hardware and operating system itself could not ever perform at these speeds. It takes much longer than a second for the GPS equipment in the iPhone to initialise and lock a position on a map. It takes much longer than two seconds for the iPhone to negotiate with a mail server and download a file - even one as small as 338KB.

The three examples shown in the advert of the iPhone being "really fast" could not ever be possible in the real world with the iPhone hardware and software as it is currently being supplied, which is why these adverts are entirely misleading and fraudulently portraying the iPhone in an unrealistic and overly positive light to consumers.

When the advert was shown:
1st August 2008 at 10:33pm, and at many other times

The advert can be seen at the following URL:
http://www.apple.com/uk/iphone/gallery/ads/everyone/

 

[arkitect]

Oh boy!
Here comes the proverbial cat amongst the pigeons…

 

[MacCobbler]

Boring. Genuinely, very boring. Surfing via my iPhone and GPS is superb, I've had no problems.

I hate to rain on your parade, but literally nothing will happen as a result of this post and it is most likely the advert will expire before people run out of enough things to do to take note of it.

I might write to MacDonalds; there was an advert on last night which depicted a perfectly 'built' Big Mac. The one I had yesterday looked like it had been put together by a four year old. Darn these crafty advertisers!

 

[philgilder]

as all the adverts say, 'network performance will vary by location'
3g has a maximum speed of ~7.2mbps on o2 in the uk, so the rendering speeds are theoretically possible (even though no one will ever get that)
and my gps locks on and loads about that quickly, even on EDGE and sometimes GPRS

 

[alFR]

If you're looking for a cause to champion, why not join an organisation that fights human rights abuses like Amnesty? Alternatively, I hear getting out more is good.

 

[bojado71]

I bet you are the kind of guy who wears a beanie with a propeller on top.

 

[sibruk]

I bet you are the kind of guy who wears a beanie with a propeller on top.

What, like Inspector Gadget? I used to dream about being him as a kid!

If you don't agree with making a complaint when something is wrong, I guess you're going to go through life putting up with a lot of crap! Maybe we should play a game of Spot the Shareholder?! Either way, thanks for bumping the thread for me, people.

 

[kdarling]

There was a video that someone made, demonstrating the speed difference...

Comparing real life to the ad

 

[sibruk]

There was a video that someone made, demonstrating the speed difference...

Comparing real life to the ad

Great link, kdarling - now THAT is precisely what I'm talking about!

philgilder, I would love to see a YouTube movie of the iPhone interface speeds you purportedly get. And, just for the record, O2's 3G theoretical maximum speed in the UK at the moment is 3.6Mbps (although never seen of course) not 7.2Mbps as Vodafone are currently marketing (despite it only being available in five London postcodes and at a handful of airports).

 

[Small White Car]

If you don't agree with making a complaint when something is wrong, I guess you're going to go through life putting up with a lot of crap! Maybe we should play a game of Spot the Shareholder?! Either way, thanks for bumping the thread for me, people.

It seems to me that countless hours of work are put into banning ads in the UK every year.

How about we start a campaign to educate you all to not believe what you see on TV?

It would probably be easier to accomplish. And the great part is we'd only have to do it ONCE! Think of the time savings in years to come as you won't have to do this again and again and again.

Plus, you can all feel smarter for having learned something new, and isn't that always a good feeling?

 

[sibruk]

It's called "Consumer Protection", SWC... No company should be able to make false claims about their products. Including Apple! No, I'd rather keep our industry watchdog, if you don't mind.

 

[Small White Car]

It's called "Consumer Protection", SWC... No company should be able to make false claims about their products. Including Apple! No, I'd rather keep our industry watchdog, if you don't mind.

Ok, I just like to save time whenever possible, is all. I enjoy finding more efficient ways to do things.

But I guess that's just me.

 

[jonnyb]

I don't agree with the OP on this particular point but I'm intrigued by how many Americans seem OK with the idea that being lied to is routine and OK and it's the responsibility of the viewer/reader/listener to tell which are the lies and which is the truth (I'm talking specifically about products here not news/politics)

Given that a huge proportion of US TV advertising is for drugs, I therefore assume you'd all be OK with the manufacturers being allowed to make outlandish claims for their products? Who needs a body like the Food and Drug Administration when everyone can be left to their own interpretations of drug manufacturers' claims, right?

 

[StoneColdSober]

No offense, but I can think of at least a hundred things I would rather have my government working on fixing rather than worrying about whether or not a commercial is truly representative of what it is advertising. And since my government is spending my tax dollars....

I can see the need for consumer protection but it's not like the iPhone is advertising false capabilities. Be real and as a previous poster said, don't believe everything you see on TV. I hope I don't ruin your day by informing you that Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and the Incredible Hulk are fictional and that just because they may be used in a commercial does not mean they are real and does not mean they are really endorsing the product.

I personally think that Apple should start advertising that the iPhone 3G can increase gas mileage (theoretically possible if someone were to use gps maps and live traffic updates to avoid traffic jams) and that it can increase someone's income (again, theoretically possible as some of the features could increase a business person's productivity) and the list goes on.

I should go work for Apple's marketing department. Oh, wait, these ads might get pulled or never run in the UK if some people had their way.

Or maybe I am completely off base and some people in the UK need this kind of "consumer protection." Clearly incidents such as this and this and many other similar events in the UK demonstrate that there are a number of people who need to be protected from advertisements about the capabilities of products.

For those in the UK who don't need this kind of protection, please don't feel offended, I really am not trying to generalize.

Given that a huge proportion of US TV advertising is for drugs, I therefore assume you'd all be OK with the manufacturers being allowed to make outlandish claims for their products? Who needs a body like the Food and Drug Administration when everyone can be left to their own interpretations of drug manufacturers' claims, right?

This is comparing apples (pun intended) and oranges. Drugs, food, medical services, these are different. If I buy an iPhone it isn't like I may die or have a truly nasty adverse reaction because my phone doesn't act just the way they say it does on TV.

 

[jonnyb]

Or maybe I am completely off base and some people in the UK need this kind of "consumer protection." Clearly incidents such as this and this and many other similar events in the UK demonstrate that there are a number of people who need to be protected from advertisements about the capabilities of products.

For those in the UK who don't need this kind of protection, please don't feel offended, I really am not trying to generalize.

The second of your two examples is a guy from the Czech Republic. but I take your point.

However, there are clear responsibilities that corporations have to their consumers to be truthful and honest in their dealings with their customers. Corporations are in business to make money and they ought not to be allowed to do so by misleading their customers.

Most companies self-regulate but some do not and that's where a separate body has to regulate - see reference above to drug regulatory bodies such as the US's FDA. There has to be an independent voice that stops corporations from taking advantage of their customers' trust, surely?

 

[Small White Car]

Given that a huge proportion of US TV advertising is for drugs, I therefore assume you'd all be OK with the manufacturers being allowed to make outlandish claims for their products? Who needs a body like the Food and Drug Administration when everyone can be left to their own interpretations of drug manufacturers' claims, right?

Ah, but see, we care about important things in ads, rather than every little stupid thing.

So, drug ads, regulated.
Children's ads, regulated (because they're too young to understand).


Things that are not important?
Having a particular beer does not make hot babes like you.
Fast food is not actually good.
Your SUV will never be driven in the woods.
An iPhone doesn't work that fast.
You're not really buying car insurance from a lizard.

These things are NOT important. If there's someone out there that wants to believe these things, I say we let them. The government should protect us where it matters, yes, but if I want to believe that Taco Bell food looks good, why should they get in the way of that?

Are ads like this one banned in the UK too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3g_37Kb3cY

Because that's very unrealistic. HP computers don't work like that. I find them very cool, but I guess if you're going to take everything literally they could be a problem. I dunno, I just don't think it really matters.

 

[paj]

No offense, but I can think of at least a hundred things I would rather have my government working on fixing rather than worrying about whether or not a commercial is truly representative of what it is advertising. And since my government is spending my tax dollars....

Do people ever research before posting.

The ASA is not part of the government, nor is it funded by tax payers money. It's funded by the advertisers!
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/about/short_guide/

 

[StoneColdSober]

The second of your two examples is a guy from the Czech Republic. but I take your point.

However, there are clear responsibilities that corporations have to their consumers to be truthful and honest in their dealings with their customers. Corporations are in business to make money and they ought not to be allowed to do so by misleading their customers.

Most companies self-regulate but some do not and that's where a separate body has to regulate - see reference above to drug regulatory bodies such as the US's FDA. There has to be an independent voice that stops corporations from taking advantage of their customers' trust, surely?

He may have been from the Czech Republic but it happened in the UK.

My point is that there is a difference between false advertising and what Apple is doing here. Unfortunately in marketing there is a very large gray area but I don't think any of Apple's ads have strayed very far into said gray area. Sure, they cut some time off of how quickly an app may load or how quickly you can browse the internet, I don't see anything wrong with that. I am fine with exaggeration. It is what marketing is about.

 

[philgilder]

philgilder, I would love to see a YouTube movie of the iPhone interface speeds you purportedly get. And, just for the record, O2's 3G theoretical maximum speed in the UK at the moment is 3.6Mbps (although never seen of course) not 7.2Mbps as Vodafone are currently marketing (despite it only being available in five London postcodes and at a handful of airports).

i never said i get them, just that they are the theoretical maximum speeds of 3g (and i couldn't remember what o2s speed limit was) with perfect network conditions, so therefore the renderings could be possible if you were able to get perfect network conditions, although this is (virtually) impossible
why not complain about vodafones advertising as well then?

 

[jonnyb]

I was just about to post the same thing - the ASA is funded by the advertisers themselves with a fractional proportion of their spend. So, now you know it's not the Government wasting our taxpayers' pounds do you see it in a different light?

 

[Trajectory]

What a complete waste of time.

 

[Small White Car]

My point is that there is a difference between false advertising and what Apple is doing here. Unfortunately in marketing there is a very large gray area but I don't think any of Apple's ads have strayed very far into said gray area. Sure, they cut some time off of how quickly an app may load or how quickly you can browse the internet, I don't see anything wrong with that. I am fine with exaggeration. It is what marketing is about.

This is important.

No one here is saying they should be allowed to advertise things the phone can't do. If they say "gets 4 days of battery life" then yes, I'd want that ad banned. That's an actual lie.

But showing things happening a little bit faster than reality? That's not a lie, that's one of these gray-zones. I find it acceptable, though.

If I could only watch things in real-time on TV it would get very dull indeed.

 

[arkitect]

No offense, but I can think of at least a hundred things I would rather have my government working on fixing rather than worrying about whether or not a commercial is truly representative of what it is advertising. And since my government is spending my tax dollars....

Our government has bugger-all to do with this…

Do people ever research before posting.

The ASA is not part of the government, nor is it funded by tax payers money. It's funded by the advertisers!
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/about/short_guide/

Thanks for posting that…
I was just about to do it myself.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is the independent self-regulatory organisation (SRO) of the advertising industry in the United Kingdom. The ASA is a non-statutory organisation and so cannot interpret or enforce legislation. However, its code of advertising practice broadly reflects legislation in many instances. The ASA is not funded by the British Government, but by a levy on the advertising industry.

 

[eplchamps0304]

it's a false claim and the ad should have been Yankee. You don't get all parts of the Internet on the iPhone (apple could have made this happen), even though you get the best mobile browsing experience hands down. Bottom line is it's not the complete Internet. They shouldn't be allowed to lie, as no other company should. Period.

 

[jonnyb]

He may have been from the Czech Republic but it happened in the UK.
.

That's why I said 'I take your point'.

I also said I didn't agree with the OP's point about this particular case but I do think that a regulatory body that protects consumers, of whatever commodity, from lies can only be a good thing - and especially if it's funded by the advertisers themselves!