DECISION by niusheng11



                                Chairman’s Ruling

                                 23 February 2009

Complaint 09/021

                      Complainant: W. Price
                      Advertisement: Acme Clearance Company

Complaint: The television advertisement said “The five million dollar CD, DVD and
Book Sale is on now. …. Open everyday from 9am to 8 pm at the ASB

Complainant, W. Price, said “I went to the Auckland Show Grounds on the evening
of the 23rd December 2008 and was greeted with a sign at the venue saying that
DVDs were on sale from 26th December 2008. The Advertisement on TV1 came on
after I had arrived back home. The Advertisement still proclaimed that DVDs were
for sale.
I object to the untruth that was being perpetrated.”

The relevant provision was Rule 2 of the Code of Ethics.

The Advertiser, Acme Clearance Company, said:

“I, from Nexus Television Productions am responding on behalf of my client, Acme
Clearance Company in relation to the official complaint 09/021.

Firstly the Advertiser would like to apologise to W. Price for any inconvenience he
may have suffered for what can only be described as misfortunate and frustrating for
all concerned.

Acme were advertising on the 23rd of December, 2008. That they have Cd's, DVD's
and books for sale, unfortunately late on that day the Censorship Board of New
Zealand requested Acme to rebadge 90% of their DVD's on sale to meet New
Zealand classification laws, this was a simple task of placing NZ stickers over the
Australian classification versions.

The staff at the Auckland centre took the correct decision in putting off sales of the
DVD's so customers were not sold DVD's with the incorrect classification label, until
they could work through this issue.
                                          2                                    09/021

The television commercial could not be changed on this date or pulled from on air, as
over the Christmas period the networks require commercials to be booked and
locked in a week in advance, besides the fact our network contacts had already left
for the Christmas break. If it was any other time of the year the commercial could
have been pulled until the DVD's were correct.

Once the DVD's were rebadged and the Censorship board passed the changes the
DVD's were released back on sale.

The Advertiser regrets the incident, but believes his staff acted in the correct manor.
MR Whale has always asked myself to ensure all his commercials are a true and fair
representation of the Television Authorities Codes and always complies with there

He once again apologise to W. Price for any inconvenience.”

Commercial Approvals Bureau (CAB) said on behalf of the media:

“… When approving a commercial we rely on the word of the advertiser that any
price or service descriptions are correct. In conversations with the advertiser's
agency, we continue to believe that this commercial was prepared in good faith and
that there was no deliberate intent to mislead the public.

The last minute decision to postpone the sale of DVDs was in response to the
discovery that many of the DVD on sale did not comply with the NZ Office of Film &
Literature Classification's labelling requirements. The decision was made by local
retail staff and not communicated to the advertising department in time for them to
amend the campaign.

We understand that the advertiser has apologised for any inconvenience and do not
believe that there are grounds for this complaint to be upheld.”

The Chairman noted the concern of W. Price regarding the promotion of DVDs at
the sale. She then took into account the explanations received on behalf of the
Advertiser and the Media that the DVDs needed an alteration to comply with the NZ
Office of Film & Literature Classification’s labeling requirements, and that the
advertisement had been pre-booked for screening and time did not allow for it to be
altered. As such, she was reassured that there had been no intention to mislead the
consumer, and the parties to the matter had acted in the best way they could, given
the circumstances. Accordingly, the Chairman said the complaint had been resolved
and it would serve no further purpose to place it before the Complaints Board.

The Chairman ruled that the complaint was resolved.

Chairman’s Ruling: Complaint Resolved

To top