The Inquirer-Home

Virgin Media gets told off for misleading broadband ad

Advertising body prohibits use of ad again
Wed Jun 29 2011, 13:58

THE UK ADVERTISING STANDARDS AUTHORITY (ASA) has scolded internet service provider (ISP) Virgin Media over a misleading broadband ad, which it said it cannot use again.

The ad, which included a banner displayed on a number of web sites and a web site called Stop the Broadband Con, appeared in December of last year. It berated rival ISPs over their allegedly misleading advertising practices, yet committed several of its own.

Both Sky and British Telecom (BT) challenged the ad, which they said was derogatory towards them and insinuated that they dealt with their customers in a dishonest fashion, as well as being highly misleading about a number of claims made by Virgin Media. They raised eight points of objection to the ad, all of which were upheld by the ASA.

The first centred on the denigratory attitude towards rivals. The ASA found that language like "support the campaign for broadband honesty", "you deserve the truth" and "stop the broadband con" unfairly maligned competitors.

The second focused on the Virgin Media claim that ADSL subscribers are getting lower speeds than what they pay for, which Sky and BT said was misleading, as they were committed to explaining ADSL speeds up front to their customers at the point of sale. The ASA found that the Virgin Media claim was misleading because it suggested that only Virgin Media supplied internet speed information to customers.

The third objection was the claim that "faster broadband means better broadband, whether you're surfing the web [or] watching TV online", which Sky and BT said was not true, as there is sometimes not a perceivable benefit to web surfing or video streaming from faster broadband speeds. The ASA agreed.

The fourth and fifth issues addressed Virgin Media's claim that Ofcom found its broadband to be twice as fast as that of other ISPs. BT claimed that this was misleading, as the Ofcom report did not factor in its Infinity service, while Sky said it did not take into account Virgin Media's traffic management policies, which could significantly slow broadband speeds. The ASA agreed on both counts.

The sixth complaint was the suggestion by Virgin Media that an average speed of 6.5Mbits/s would lead to delays in internet usage. Sky claimed that this was an exaggeration, as users with that download speed would generally not incur delays. The ASA said there was no evidence to suggest there would be such delays and that the claim was therefore misleading.

The seventh contention opposed Virgin Media's suggestion that all of its customers received around 90 per cent of its advertised speed, which both Sky and the ASA found misleading. The Virgin Media claim only applied to average speeds, not the top end speeds that were advertised, but its wording suggested otherwise.

The eighth and final issue was the claim by Virgin Media that it doesn't use "old-fashioned telephone lines", which Sky alleged was untrue, as it did use them for its ADSL network. The ASA said Virgin Media's claim only applied to its cable broadband service but the language suggested it was universal and was therefore misleading.

The ASA found that the ad breached the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code on several accounts related to misleading customers, exaggeration of claims, lack of susbstantiation of claims and denigration of competitors. It banned Virgin Media from using the ad again in its current form and told it to refrain from discrediting its rivals and to make its comparative claims more clear in the future.

The irony of the situation is that Vigin Media's ad urged the ASA to "put a stop to misleading broadband advertising once and for all". We guess Virgin Media got its wish then. µ

Share this:

Comments
ASA smackdown for truth and honesty

If the ISPs are not conning us then the ASA are.

Sky, BT etc. are guilty of false or deceptive advertising, selling up to 20Mb despite the average customer receiving less than half the advertised speed. Only a tiny minority able to receive anything close to 20Mb via BT copper wire.

If it wasn't for Virgin Media spearheading competition within the UK we'd all still be on BT 512K.

Virgin 30Mb, typical 30Mb
BT/Sky 20Mb, typical 8Mb

posted by : Jonas, 01 July 2011 Complain about this comment
Good. At last!

Good to see this at last.

Regardless of the merits or otherwise of VM's network over its competitors, this campaign was always a bit "rich", given that VM are as guilty as the rest when it comes to, shall we say, not very clear advertising.

posted by : Nige, 29 June 2011 Complain about this comment
Competition is a good thing

Virgin's service is not "far superior"--or not for everyone, anyway. After years of high quality cable service courtesy of Telewest, at about the same time this ad was shown I had finally decided to switch from cable to BT ADSL (provided by Plusnet) because Virgin have apparently become disinterested in supplying a service that works, provided you pay your bills: I experienced 30-60% packet loss continuously over a period of 4 months, which Virgin absolutely refused to acknowledge was due to their having attracted so many customers (arguably through their misleading advertising) that they don't have the backbone bandwidth to cope with them all. For me, ADSL is both faster and cheaper--and most of all, Plusnet technical support will not try to fob you off with timewasting scripts and lame excuses for months on end.

posted by : Dave, 29 June 2011 Complain about this comment
Sky and BT got done

Wihout Virgin pushing super fast broadband BT and Sky would still be using copper lines.

This is tit for tat regulations because Virgin offer a far superior internet service.

If BT and Sky focused on upgrading their own service, they may not need to use tit for tat measures in order to keep competitive.

posted by : Daniel, 29 June 2011 Complain about this comment
aboutus
Advertisement
Subscribe to INQ newsletters
Advertisement
INQ Poll

Facebook starts selling shares

Will you buy Facebook shares?