A
Administrator
Guest Shopper
A reverse auction on Gems TV, broadcast at 2am, which was a repeat of an earlier live broadcast, featured ruby items of jewellery. A voice-over explained “You’ll be playing against either the clock or other callers. The price will continue to fall until either the quantity or the time reaches zero, at which point the game ends”. A presenter described the products and on-screen graphics showed the number of items left available and the current price, which dropped as the presentation went on. Throughout the sales auction, the presenter drew the viewers’ attention to the price drops and the number of items left available. A ticker tape, at the bottom of the screen, which ran throughout, stated “This is a repeat show. Stock is subject to availability and may have sold out. Please contact our call centre to check stock levels before placing an order. For live games, tune in from 7am to 2am”.<br /><br />One viewer challenged whether:<br /><br />1. the ad made clear enough that the output was recorded, because he believed the broadcast could mislead consumers into believing the auction was live and that it was necessary to quickly make a purchase before that game ended and stock was exhausted,<br />2. there was a sufficient stock of items to satisfy demand.<br /><br />GemsTV Response:<br /><br />1. Gems TV (UK) Ltd (Gems TV) stated that they had been broadcasting pre-recorded shows between 2am and 7am since August 2009 and that they showed recordings of the live shows broadcast during the day; the presenters did not mention that they were repeat broadcasts. They said the ticker tape message at the bottom of the screen, which scrolled continually throughout the presentation, made clear to the viewer that the presentations were repeats and so viewers would not be misled into thinking that it was a live presentation. They added that they were consistent with other TV presentations on similar home shopping channels.<br /><br />2. They stated that the live daytime presentations used for overnight replay were chosen on the basis that the product lines had sufficient quantities of stock available for the expected demand when repeating broadcasts and they would always try to ensure that there was sufficient stock for all the products re-shown in the hour. Nevertheless, they also ensured that the scrolling text highlighted that the stock did need to be checked with the call centre to confirm availability. They said they repeated each hour once only to ensure there was sufficient stock for demand and as a business they would want to ensure the stock was available for sale. They also pointed out that a number of the games finished because the clock appeared and the time elapsed, rather than because all the items available during the presentation had been allocated. They explained that the process for selecting which hours to repeat was to consider a system-generated report, which highlighted the relevant hours to replay on the basis that there was stock available, but this report was produced in real-time and was saved or not printed.<br /><br />The ASA made the following assessment:<br /><br />1. Not upheld<br />The ASA noted that the ticker tape continuously informed viewers that the presentation was a repeat and considered that most viewers would therefore understand that the presentation was not live. We considered that most viewers would understand that the repeat broadcast was an additional opportunity to view items which had previously been for sale on the channel, but were likely to still be available.<br /><br />Because we considered that the ticker tape made clear that the presentation and auction were not live, we concluded that the broadcast was not misleading on that point.<br /><br />On this point, we investigated the broadcast under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1.1, 5.1.2 (Misleading) and 5.2.1 (Claims), but did not find it in breach.<br /><br />2. Upheld<br />We understood that Gems TV selected its presentations to repeat by establishing whether there was stock still available, and that they used a report to determine those presentations. We noted, however, that they were unable to provide copies of the selection report, because they maintained printed copies were not kept, and that we had not seen any other substantiation showing that stock was available; for example, that stock was sold at the time of the repeat. We noted in addition that the ticker tape informed viewers that stock might not always be available.<br /><br />Because we had not seen evidence which showed that there was sufficient stock available during the repeated broadcasts, we considered the broadcast was likely to mislead on that point.<br /><br />On this point, the broadcast breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1.1, 5.1.2 (Misleading) and 5.2.1 (Claims)<br /><br />The broadcaster must ensure sufficient stock is available for the repeated broadcasts.
