Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone advert banned for exaggerating speed

PowerFullMac said:
It was talking about how the internet, e-mail etc. was twice as fast because it is through 3G!
Click to expand...

It was talking about the iPhone and FOCUSSED on the internet. What you're suggesting is they could show the phone opening a photo using CS4 and then say "We never said the iPhone would run Photoshop - we were advertising the speed it would download a photo."

Adverts have to be a true representation of the product.
 
OllyW said:
I hope you are not basing the quality of the entire BBC network on one incident that was totally blown out of all proportions by the gutter press? Of course all of the output from the BBC isn't brilliant, but over my lifetime at least it has been consistently of a higher standard than the output from the UK's commercial channels.

Perhaps you prefer the Sky alternative where you pay a high monthly subscription and still get the programmes chopped up to accommodate the advertisements?
Click to expand...

You'd still need a TV Licence.
 
toontra said:
So why make 22 posts in this thread? Oh yeah, just boost you post count and waste everyone's time.

I'll know not to bother replying to any of your future remarks.
Click to expand...

I've just read back over PowerFullMac's posts and I agree. Count me in on that boycott...
 
While I 100% agree that ads should not mislead, I have to wonder what effect the banning of the advert has done. It can't be shown in it's current form so will probably be modified slightly. However the amount of column inches, blog space and forum posts has just given Apple a ton of free advertising. The kind that money can't buy.

I think the ASA has a role but I also think that when they ban ads are they actually doing more harm than good by generating free column inches for the offending ad.

As for the real effect on peoples purchasing habits, would the ad really have that much of impact. Probably not. People will either buy the phone and say "it's not like the ad, can I have my money back", will buy it and think "it's not quite like the ad but I'm still gonna keep it" or they won't care because they love the phone so much.
 
saracen said:
I think the ASA has a role but I also think that when they ban ads are they actually doing more harm than good by generating free column inches for the offending ad.
Click to expand...

The ASA isn't trying to stop Apple from advertising their phone - it's stopping them from lying about it. If anything, all the column inches and blogs will simply allow people to discuss the matter and gather more information about the product to make a more informed purchase - EXACTLY what the ASA wants.

One thing I saw online was a direct comparison between the ad and a real iPhone (which took about 2mins30sec opposed to the ad's 29sec) - proving the ASA's point.
 
saracen said:
While I 100% agree that ads should not mislead, I have to wonder what effect the banning of the advert has done. It can't be shown in it's current form so will probably be modified slightly. However the amount of column inches, blog space and forum posts has just given Apple a ton of free advertising. The kind that money can't buy.
Click to expand...

That's precisely why it's a deeply cynical exercise - by the time the ad is banned it has run for a few weeks anyway, maybe it's entire scheduled run, and Apple are a regular and repeat offender and know this very well. I can't see an easy alternative though; the only two options are to forget regulation and get back to the good old days of "healthy smoking" on tighten the pre-release screening (I'm not sure how this ad slipped through that particular net).

As to your point about free advertising due to the ban, I doubt it. All it does is make clear to people that Apple have mislead people about the speed of the iPhone - it's not as fast as they say/show. Don't really see how that can be positive for them.
 
bananabar said:
The ASA isn't trying to stop Apple from advertising their phone - it's stopping them from lying about it. If anything, all the column inches and blogs will simply allow people to discuss the matter and gather more information about the product to make a more informed purchase - EXACTLY what the ASA wants.

One thing I saw online was a direct comparison between the ad and a real iPhone (which took about 2mins30sec opposed to the ad's 29sec) - proving the ASA's point.
Click to expand...

Even if the aim is for people to be more informed, and the banning generates further discussion, I don't think that this misleading advert will hurt their sales. Not if the amount of buying I saw in the Apple store yesterday is anything to go by.
 
toontra said:
That's precisely why it's a deeply cynical exercise
Click to expand...

I agree

toontra said:
As to your point about free advertising due to the ban, I doubt it. All it does is make clear to people that Apple have mislead people about the speed of the iPhone - it's not as fast as they say/show. Don't really see how that can be positive for them.
Click to expand...

Perhaps free advertising is a wrong expression but it's certainly generating a lot of exposure for Apple, even if it is negative. I'm reminded of the old adage "there is no such thing as bad publicity".
 
toontra said:
So why make 22 posts in this thread? Oh yeah, just boost you post count and waste everyone's time.

I'll know not to bother replying to any of your future remarks.
Click to expand...

The post you quoted was referring to the BBC arguments and I only done 2-3 posts on that.

I do think Apple's ad is not misleading.
 
paulsalter said:
Apple must have also agreed it was wrong by changing it, surely if the ad was right Apple would have objected to the ruling (or did I miss this bit)
Click to expand...

Quite so. As well as being serial mis-advertisers, they are also notoriously litigious. As you, if they felt they were being unfairly treated (as so many here seem to think) then I'm sure they would have taken some form of legal action.

BTW, just to make it clear, I have spent many thousands of £'s on Apple products over 15 years, and they do some things very well, but this repeated advertising nonsense is really knocking their corporate image in my eyes.
 
What is it with certain people across the pond (I'm only speaking of those who agree with the ASA on this issue)? Do you REALLY think that everything you see in an ad is factually correct, especially as presented? What about ads from other cell phone manufacturers? When a company has a specific time limit for the ad, they will oftentimes, at least here in the States, accelerate the functionality of the device to maximize that which can be presented in said time limit. I don't believe ANY of the cell phone ads, at least with respect to their visual claims (how fast it works during the ad), because I know they have a limited time to present their product.

The ASA should get a thicker skin. Waaaah my iPhone isn't really that fast. Advertisers, since time immemorial, have stretched or obfuscated the truth in order to convince you to purchase their products, which is not necessarily a bad thing. That is precisely why you need to research your purchases, and not base your purchasing decision solely on what is presented in an ad.

Actually, my iPhone isn't even as fast as the demo unit Steve Jobs used when it was first presented. Maybe we should sue Apple to get those iPhones, or force them to use a "normal" iPhone during MacWorld and/or WWDC. Seriously, I don't get the argument against Apple. You could also use that argument against manufacturers of other products such as, say, vehicles, televisions, computers (other than Apple, since you're already picking on them), etc...

HawaiiMacAddict
 
toontra said:
Do you mean you don't think it's legally misleading in Portugal or you don't personally think it's misleading?
Click to expand...

Personally I don't think it's misleading but it could be that ads here are bound by different kinds of laws, so maybe I'm used to ads like that. For example, that Instinct vs. iPhone ad would be illegal here, because a company can't compare its product directly against other product.
 
HawaiiMacAddict said:
Do you REALLY think that everything you see in an ad is factually correct, especially as presented?
Click to expand...

No. But there ARE rules. Washing powder ads can only claim what is scientifically proven about their products. You can only make direct claims that are true. Can't you see the difference between something being in an advert, and specifically, explicitly making claims about the quantitatively measurable abilities of a product which are simply not true?
 
Aloha djellison,

I don't quite get your point. In the ad in question, where did they claim that the speed shown was the speed one should expect to achieve on one's own iPhone? The ad only showed the iPhone's functionality. There was another ad concerning speed, but the main point of this ad was what the iPhone can do, not how fast it can be done.

HawaiiMacAddict
 
HawaiiMacAddict said:
What is it with certain people across the pond (I'm only speaking of those who agree with the ASA on this issue)? Do you REALLY think that everything you see in an ad is factually correct, especially as presented? What about ads from other cell phone manufacturers? When a company has a specific time limit for the ad, they will oftentimes, at least here in the States, accelerate the functionality of the device to maximize that which can be presented in said time limit. I don't believe ANY of the cell phone ads, at least with respect to their visual claims (how fast it works during the ad), because I know they have a limited time to present their product.

The ASA should get a thicker skin. Waaaah my iPhone isn't really that fast. Advertisers, since time immemorial, have stretched or obfuscated the truth in order to convince you to purchase their products, which is not necessarily a bad thing. That is precisely why you need to research your purchases, and not base your purchasing decision solely on what is presented in an ad.

Actually, my iPhone isn't even as fast as the demo unit Steve Jobs used when it was first presented. Maybe we should sue Apple to get those iPhones, or force them to use a "normal" iPhone during MacWorld and/or WWDC. Seriously, I don't get the argument against Apple. You could also use that argument against manufacturers of other products such as, say, vehicles, televisions, computers (other than Apple, since you're already picking on them), etc...

HawaiiMacAddict
Click to expand...

You're wasting your breath, friend. Most of the people here (in this thread) simply don't listen to reason, I'm afraid.

I can't imagine what else the ASA is going to have to ban based on this case... Just imagine it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back