Verily I say unto thee, that chrisv spake thusly:
> chrisv wrote:
>
>> One problem is that it's likely not possible to legislate some of
>> these finer points of what is "fair", or what is a
>> "recommendation", or what is "obviously" a paid advertisement. Any
>> attempt would result in vague and unenforceable laws, I'm afraid.
I doubt if the CAP Code traps every violation, but at least that code of
practise exists, and can be enforced when consumers bring violations to
the ASA's attention. Better to have some measure of control over
deceptive advertisers than none at all, because if left unregulated you
can be sure such people would stoop to any depths to con money from you.
> One thing that comes to mind is the "Monster cable" scam. This is an
> organized scam that takes consumers for $millions each year. People
> go to stores and have salesmen LIE to their face about the "night
> and day" benefits of using expensive cables for one's audio and
> video.
>
> Should these asshole bes sued? Arrested? Taken-out and shot?
>
> Maybe all three, but I don't see anyone doing anything about it...
Maybe if they were giving ostensibly impartial recommendations that were
actually paid endorsements, without revealing that fact, then people
might be inclined to complain.
Some people, anyway.
Like these people, for instance:
[quote]
Complaint
Objection to a national press ad, for a price comparison service, that
was headlined "Find the best gas, electricity and broadband deal in one
easy phone call". Text below stated "The Times has teamed up with
SimplySwitch, the leading price comparison service, to help our readers
save hundreds of pounds a year on gas, electricity and broadband charges
... We find you the best deal, including capped price offers Independent
- not owned by any supplier ... You can save over £200* by changing your
gas and electricity provider ..."
...
Complaint upheld
...
The ASA considered that the claim "Independent - not owned by any
supplier" suggested no commercial link between SimplySwitch and
suppliers and therefore that consumers would think that the "impartial
switching service" was available in respect of any supplier. We noted
that SimplySwitch could switch consumers only to those suppliers who
paid them commission. We concluded that, because their capacity to
switch consumers was dependent on which suppliers paid them commission,
the claims "Independent - not owned by any supplier" and "impartial
switching service", when read together in the same advertisment, were
misleading. We noted the ad was no longer appearing but told
SimplySwitch not to repeat the claim to be "independent" in future
advertising without making plain that the switching service was limited
to those suppliers with which they had a commercial agreement.
The claim breached CAP Code clause 7.1 (Truthfulness).
[/quote]
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/non_broadcast/Adjudication+Details.htm?Adjudication_id=41342
As for whether or not speaker cable salesmen are lying:
[quote]
Blind Test: Most Listeners Can Tell the Difference Between Speaker Cables
Skeptics (including me) love to laugh at people who claim they can hear
the difference between stereo components hooked up with one cable vs.
another. Can wires really be that important in the audio experience?
The Wall Street Journal put the question to the test at a recent audio
show, renting a booth, and hooking up two sets of identical components,
differing only by the speaker cable. One set used off-the-roll, 14-gauge
speaker cable from a hardware store. Another used a pair of Sigma Retro
Gold cables from Monster, $2,000 for 16 feet of cable total and "as
thick as your thumb." The writer couldn't tell the difference and
figured no one else could either.
Surprise: People who visited the booth and listened to both sets of
equipment (not in view) preferred the expensively cabled audio equipment
61 percent of the time.
[/quote]
http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/null/65929
Esoteric audio suffers from the law of diminishing returns, but the
differences at the lower end of the scale can be quite profound. If any
salesman is literally making a "Night & Day" comparison between two
highly expensive brands, for example, then I'd say that was an
exaggeration at best, and possibly outright deception, depending on the
circumstancs. But if he makes that claim WRT bell-wire compared to
carbon-shielded; Oxygen Free Copper (OFC) cable, then I think you'd find
he has a point.
Personally I recommend Van den Hull, but then I can make that
recommendation with a clear conscience, since I'm not being paid to
endorse their products, nor am I being paid to do so secretly, such that
I falsely appear to be impartial.
>From the original article:
[quote]
The latter have a sense of humor and shrug that theirs is just one of
many hobbies -- like wine -- for people with money, expansive
vocabularies and the ability to discern differences lost on the rest of us.
[/quote]
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120044692027492991-Po6L667z7U6W9ZfTfXBmeCKlV80_20080214.html
Perhaps I'm just one of those people who can discern those subtle
differences more readily ... like the difference between honest
advertising and a blatant deception.
Fortunately I seem to be one of those whom the ASA /doesn't/ need to
protect, although the fact that I'm astute enough to avoid becoming a
victim of marketing deceptions, should not mean I just ignore such
violations, and leave others less fortunate to suffer at the hands of
conmen. Doing so would be like walking away from the scene of a mugging,
without even calling the police, much less actually trying to help the
victim more directly. There are some things I just can't do in good
conscience.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
| the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
| weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
02:25:13 up 33 days, 10:08, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00
|
|
