Why
- Thread starter Mommabear
- Start date
Help Support ShoppingTelly:
PJ.
In an Ideal World ...
I don't understand why some people's defence of bid is that we are just watching too much off it and other broadcasters get away with it. I don't complain about other channels because I don't watch many of the others. It is a bit like the Sachsgate affair. Until the media got hold of the story only 4 people complained. Then others were suddenly offended by it even though they didn't hear it. I can't complain about something I haven't seen.
It might surprise many that I only watch 30 mins or so a day of bid to get me off to sleep but it wouldn't matter if I watched it all the hours it is on that is allowed. If you think the ASA have something against bid then complain about them. If we see something bad we have every right to complain then the ASA decide and contrary to popular belief Wirral doesn't run them.
PJ
It might surprise many that I only watch 30 mins or so a day of bid to get me off to sleep but it wouldn't matter if I watched it all the hours it is on that is allowed. If you think the ASA have something against bid then complain about them. If we see something bad we have every right to complain then the ASA decide and contrary to popular belief Wirral doesn't run them.
PJ
The comments made about me regarding the ASA are as hilarious as they are ludicrous.
If I spend so much time complaining about Sit-Up to the ASA how on earth have I avoided them placing an embargo on me contacting them about Sit Up? I only know of two people on here who have had such an embargo placed on them because of the sheer amount of times they have complained, both of whom have openly admitted that on here and yet I am the one who supposedly always complains.
For the record I haven't complained about Sit-Up even 10 times, in fact I haven't ever made 10 complaints about all the companies that exist 10 times, combined. But I still find it very funny though, you do have to laugh!
Last edited:
Because i suspect you research the complaints thoroughly and work the system correctly
Not a negative just not something i did i just logged a load and they probably got annoyed with me fair enough...
PJ that is not my defence of bid at all
I have stated 3 times in the last 24 hours i believe Bid should be punished, aslong as others are treated and regulated the same way
not that hard a point to make but i have to keep making it
Not a negative just not something i did i just logged a load and they probably got annoyed with me fair enough...
PJ that is not my defence of bid at all
I have stated 3 times in the last 24 hours i believe Bid should be punished, aslong as others are treated and regulated the same way
not that hard a point to make but i have to keep making it
PJ.
In an Ideal World ...
I think you are overly complicating what Wirral is doing here. He sees something he doesn't like and complains to the ASA whole either totally or partially agree to his comments.
I said some people. I didn't say you Newty dear ;-)
PJ
PJ.
In an Ideal World ...
As I know his real name I know he is a he ;-)
I only ever complain when something is blatantly wrong, for example when Peter Sherlock categorically, and exhaustively says the 36 bottles of a particular brand of perfume are the last in the business for 2-3 weeks and then low and behold another 270 are on sale within 36 hours (I might add I agreed that this complaint could be resolved informally so i'm really out to get Sit-Up aren't I?). Or what about when when James Russell says a £80 tablet comes pre loaded with full versions of Microsoft Office, which is beyond laughable.
I would never be trigger happy sending off multiple complaints as i'd like to think i'm far more responsible than that. It's one thing to complain when something is patently wrong but when an individual makes multiple complaints about the same company I think the ASA have a right to be suspicious, they could be originating from a competitor.
But if a complaint has basis the ASA will act. This is just my opinion but I suspect some individuals have been making multiple complaints which, to be frank, do not stand up to scrutiny and if that is the case it is wholly wrong, and very irresponsible.
Last edited:
I don't think I have ever seen a legit complaint that had merit not upheld, they are beyond fair. They even usually give the offending channel a chance to rectify that error before upholding complaints on their records.... you can't say fairer than that can you? Bids problem is they haven't stuck to their word & sorted the issues out so it ends up with the ASA having no option but to uphold complaints against them... and now get ofcom involved.
Report IW and they will get the same treatment, I honestly don't see the problem as they all get treated the same. Can anybody link any ASA rulings that went in IW/QVC/Gems etc favour but Bid had a similar one upheld? for the life of me I can't see any.
Bingo posted some a while back that were dubious
As per we are going round in circles here, I think bid have received harsher treatment than other channels most disagree with me which is fine....
It would be a curious situation if the ASA treated certain advertisers differently as they are funded by the advertisers themselves, they don't receive a penny of government funding.
However, when a company like Sit-Up behave the way they do I wouldn't be surprised if the ASA are very wary of them.
Last edited:
I suppose its good that they publish the results as it has to be above board, I do find it strange that certain people keep questioning their fairness yet don't supply any evidence for us to see ourselves.
A good example of a upheld complaint against IW would be IW's response to a complaint made against themselves (which was upheld by the ASA):
Ideal Shopping Direct plc (Ideal World) said when they first launched the N-Virosphere two and a half years ago the efficacy of the device had been substantiated by Analytical Laboratories (Singapore) Ltd and was acceptable for the claims they were making. They said they were aware of a recent ASA adjudication against Sit-Up Ltd that found that same evidence to be inadequate to support claims that the device could help asthma sufferers. They said that, although they had not made claims that the device could help asthma sufferers, they felt the evidence they had for their more moderate claims was no longer satisfactory. They said they had removed the references to "air washing" from subsequent broadcasts, and they had initiated a programme of tests to determine the efficacy of the N-Virosphere as an air-washing device
It goes to show that A)People do complain about the same issues regardless of channel & B)The ASA treat all channels the same.
Ideal Shopping Direct plc (Ideal World) said when they first launched the N-Virosphere two and a half years ago the efficacy of the device had been substantiated by Analytical Laboratories (Singapore) Ltd and was acceptable for the claims they were making. They said they were aware of a recent ASA adjudication against Sit-Up Ltd that found that same evidence to be inadequate to support claims that the device could help asthma sufferers. They said that, although they had not made claims that the device could help asthma sufferers, they felt the evidence they had for their more moderate claims was no longer satisfactory. They said they had removed the references to "air washing" from subsequent broadcasts, and they had initiated a programme of tests to determine the efficacy of the N-Virosphere as an air-washing device
It goes to show that A)People do complain about the same issues regardless of channel & B)The ASA treat all channels the same.
A cynic might think it's people who the ASA have stopped making any further complaints because they either made a ridiculous amount in a short space of time about the one company or, perhaps more likely, they were mostly a complete load of codswallop :wink:
Only 2 of my complaints weren't upheld, one being because they sorted it informally so hardly codswallop.
PJ.
In an Ideal World ...
Apparently Mike will shock me with the Avalanche watch and bottle opener price so it won't be the usual £5.99 it always is *stands by with party popper and streamers* it's ... It's ... Oh £5.99 the same as always.
PJ.
In an Ideal World ...
LoL @ Mike selling the Yarvik. Looks at Play Store. He said I thought we would have checked to see if we were signed in before but no, we should have checked that before but no.
Haha why do I get the feeling he will be shouting at someone off air.
Haha why do I get the feeling he will be shouting at someone off air.
mr tom
Registered Shopper
Indeed Benny, I think it's clear you were stopped purely because of the volume of complaints and I remember people on here being annoyed at the time. But some other peoples complaints may well fall into the category of codswallop!
