15th September 2010
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld a complaint from BSkyB about a leaflet from Virgin Media. Claims made in the leaflet were 'misleading and unfair'.
The junk mail, entitled "Why Virgin TV is better than Sky TV", featured negative comments about Sky TV made by customers who had switched from Sky to Virgin. The comments concerned the picture quality of Sky TV, the quality of Sky's customer service facilities, and the charges for its service.
Sky's complaint was that the claims made in the leaflet were misleading and unfair. In its adjudication, the regulator of advertising industry agreed with all parts of the complaint, and the leaflet will no longer appear in its current form.
Frozen and pixelated
The comment about the picture quality of Sky TV read: "Having been a Sky customer for many years we [sic] always found that the picture constantly froze or pixelated. Sky always denied that this was happening but it did." The ASA agreed with Sky that Virgin had falsely presented the loss of picture quality as a regular and ongoing problem. Sky said the problem may occur in extreme weather conditions, and that the company had acknowledged this on its website. Virgin's argument that it was sufficiently clear that the comment represented just the opinion of a single person was rejected.
Similarly, the ASA agreed that a comment about Sky's customer services was denigratory and likely to mislead: "The customer service is far better than you receive with Sky […]. Frankly, I don't understand why anyone bothers with Sky anymore!" The ASA ruled that although it is clear enough that this is the opinion of just one individual, Virgin had nevertheless raised the suggestion that Sky doesn't have adequate customer services facilities. A leaflet that is a collection of people's personal opinions should not be presented as a comparison between two rival companies, the ASA concluded.
The third part of Sky's complaint, about a claim that Virgin's service is cheaper, was also upheld. The leaflet stated that Virgin doesn't charge a fee for installing its service and that Sky charges £60. It also claimed that Virgin offered extra High Definition (HD) channels for free, while Sky charges £10 per month. The ASA agreed with Sky that it was unfair to compare Sky's standard set-up fee with a temporary special offer from Virgin. The claim that Virgin charges less for HD channels was seen as misleading because the leaflet didn't acknowledge that Virgin has significantly fewer HD channels.
Tit for tat
It's not the first time Sky and Virgin clashed over claims made in advertisements. In 2008, Virgin successfully lodged a complaint with Ofcom, the regulator and competition authority for the communications industry, about a television advertisement run by BSkyB and in July this year Virgin asked the government to stop broadband providers from making false claims about broadband speeds.