* Below are the 20 most recent rulings of the ASA. To find out how to view
all the rulings in the ASA database go to the ad library.
| 1.
DR PHAMY REHEMA HERBALIST HEALER / H PHILLIPS / 12290
(05 Feb 2010) |
On 5 December 2008, the Directorate ruled the respondent’s pamphlet advertisement made unsubstantiated and misleading claims about the ability to treat/cure various conditions and illnesses.
The advertisement claimed to heal, inter alia:
- Is it small & weak penis / early ejaculation / financial problem?
- Stolen property / Back yr loved one / Pregnancy / Long periods?
- Do you have chronic diseases in your body / Misunderstandings?
It also stated “HEALS OVER 94 DISEASES!!”
The respondent was instructed to withdraw the material with immediate effect within the deadlines stipulated in Clause 15.3 of the Procedural Guide and not use it again in future. An Ad Alert was also issued with reference to the advertisement in question due to the fact that the respondent failed to respond and an adverse ruling was made.
On 5 December 2009 the complainant lodged a breach allegation against the respondent’s pamphlets placed in letterboxes in brown envelopes. She submitted that the respondent continues to claim to be able to cure a long list of physical, psychological and emotional ailments including “chronicle” diseases. The complainant added that the respondent continues exploiting the vulnerable and gullible with untrue and dangerous claims. A copy of the advertisement was attached to the breach complaint. |
|
more...
|
|
| 2.
HEALTH PLUS DIABETES / H DAWOOD / 14705
(05 Feb 2010) |
| Mr Dawood lodged a consumer complaint against a Harmony Choice Trading’s print advertisement promoting several of the products in its range, one being “Health Plus DIABETES”. The advertisement was published in the 25 October 2009 edition of the Sunday Times magazine.
The advertisement contains, inter alia, the wording “Health Plus Diabetes controls blood sugar levels. Its composition of natural herbs helps lower blood sugar levels, repair damages to pancreatic cells, corrects excessive thirst, reduces drowsiness and fatigue and helps with skin infections”.
In essence, the complainant submitted that the advertiser should produce proof for its claims as they may mislead people suffering from diabetes if untrue and unsubstantiated. |
|
more...
|
|
| 3.
Aqua Net / C De Ruig / 14675
(05 Feb 2010) |
| Ms de Ruig lodged a consumer complaint against a print advertisement that appeared in the Homemakers fair magazine as well as the website www.aquanet.co.za
The print advertisement states, inter alia, “80mm Mesh Complies With World Standards For Pool Safety Nets”.
The internet advertisement states, inter alia, “The net mesh of 80mm is an industry first and adheres to worldwide standards for safety nets.”
In essence, the complainant submitted that the advertising is misleading as there is no world standard for safety nets. The SABS (South African Bureau of Standards) and NSPI (National Spa and Pool Institute) will verify this. |
|
more...
|
|
| 4.
KFC Boneless Chicken Pieces / A F Rose / 14630
(04 Feb 2010) |
| Ms Rose lodged a consumer complaint against a KFC television commercial promoting its Boneless Chicken Pieces.
The commercial shows a family eating KFC for supper. The father walks in just as the boy finishes his meal. He then remembers all the incidents when the boy had swallowed items and had to be taken to the doctor. He starts shaking the boy to get any chicken bones out of him. The voice-over states, “With KFC’s new boneless chicken, there’s no bones. So no worries! Mom and dad, have one less thing to worry about.”
In essence, the complainant submitted that the commercial is misleading as it gives the impression that the boneless pieces are normal size but without the bones and skin. However, the actual pieces are smaller than regular chicken pieces. |
|
more...
|
|
| 5.
Checkers Xmas Alcohol / B Young / 14865
(04 Feb 2010) |
| Ms Young lodged a consumer complaint against Checkers Better Range print advertisement that was an insert in the Independent Newspaper.
The advertisement displays various wine and sparkling wine selections. The disclaimer “WINE NOT FOR SALE TO PERSONS UNDER 18” appears on the last page of the catalogue.
In essence, the complainant submitted that the advertisement only displays the warning disclaimer at the back of the catalogue. This deliberate flouting negatively affects the society and is unacceptable. |
|
more...
|
|
|