Out-Law News 1 min. read
18 Jun 2008, 3:24 pm
The letter describing the cable company's broadband offer was sealed in a plain white envelope with no markings to identify the promoter.
The envelope featured a small hole that went right through the envelope and some of its contents and was designed to look like a bullet hole surrounded by burn marks. Ten people complained to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), saying that the bullet hole would cause offence and distress. The ASA rejected those complaints. It said the hole "was likely to be recognised as a stylised design gimmick" and that "recipients would appreciate that it was unlikely that an envelope would arrive with a bullet hole."
The ASA had its own concern, though, about Virgin's failure to identify the envelope as a promotion.
Small text on the reverse of the envelope provided a PO Box return address but Virgin Media's identity was only revealed to recipients if they opened the letter. In some cases the letter was addressed to the recipient; other times it was addressed to "The Occupier".
The ASA ruled against Virgin Media in an adjudication published today.
"We concluded that the envelope should have stated clearly that it contained marketing material to avoid ambiguity or confusion about the status of the envelope," said the ASA. "On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clause 22.1."
That provision states:
"Marketers, publishers and owners of other media should ensure that marketing communications are designed and presented in such a way that it is clear that they are marketing communications. Unsolicited e-mail marketing communications should be clearly identifiable as marketing communications without the need to open them."
Virgin was told to ensure that in future mailings envelopes should state clearly that they contained marketing material.