ASA Upholds Complaints About ONnet’s Full Internet Access Claim

ONdigital has run into trouble with the ASA over its advertising of the ONnet internet access service. National press advertising made claims that full internet access was available through the television using ONdigital equipment. Two members of the public disputed the claim by saying that the technology did not allow the use of non-web-based services such as ftp, telnet and newsgroups, while another two members of the public and BSkyB pointed out that the system could not support certain advanced technologies used increasingly on sites, such as Flash programming, and therefore did not constitute full access.

ONdigital defended itself against both complaints by pointing out that the equipment was lent to customers for free with a £5 per month usage subscription. It said that complainants were therefore “unreasonably disappointed” that functionality did not match that of a PC which would cost over £1000.

In terms of the first complaint, they said that they defined internet access as “the ability to use a device to type in a “www” address and be delivered via a telephone line connection to the entrance to the website bearing that address”. A complainant who argued that non-web-based services were part of the internet were told that knowledge of these functionalities, used to transfer data files required advanced computer knowledge which would have prevented misunderstanding of the advert.

In fact, the ONnet service offers more functionality in non-web-based services than advertised, but the company chose not to advertise this for fear of confusing its audience. The ASA nevertheless decided that the worldwide web was only one component of the internet. As a result, since ONnet’s equipment did not offer access to all the components, the claim of “full internet access” was judged to misleadingly exaggerate the level of internet access available, and the complaints were upheld.

In terms of the second complaint, the advertiser maintained that the browser it used had a high specification and would be updated periodically to ensure that many websites were accessible. The ASA noted this, but again felt that the claim of “full internet access” was not justified, as readers would understand from it that all websites were accessible and veiwable when using the advertised product. Once again the complaints were upheld and the ASA suggested that ONdigital should amend its copy with the help of the Committee of Advertising Practice Copy Advice Team.

Advertising Standards Authority: 020 7580 5555 www.asa.org.uk

Subscribers can access ten years of media news and analysis in the Archive