Can Self-regulation Hold Off the Ad Police?

Michael Hedges November 8, 2004

EU Consumer Protection Commissioner David Byrne told the World Advertising Federation in October that self-regulation is a good idea and he expected the industry to rise to the challenge.

Byrne called on the ad industry to demonstrate that it “imposes high standards on itself and that it meets them.”

Advertising is an easy target. It’s about persuasion, though for some it’s about deception; getting unsuspecting people to buy things they don’t need. The EU’s Misleading Advertising Directive, adopted in 1984, tackled the subject generally. The Commission’s  authority over advertising and its practice was reinforced by the 2001 Tobacco Products Directive and the 2003 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.

Ad rules in Europe call for clear distinctions between ad content and the rest of the TV program, radio show or magazine article. A DJ singing the jingle for Nescafé is rarely allowed without some disclosure of the sponsorship. Most European governments have adopted rules in varying levels of strictness for advertising directed to children, as well as tobacco and alcohol advertising.

Consumer groups have successfully directed regulators attention to the impact of advertising on health problems in children. French lawmakers have banned junk-food vending machines from schools beginning in 2005 along with imposing new taxes on junk food advertising. 

Starting November 1st, the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) now passes judgment on all media. Radio and TV ads were added to ASA’s portfolio of billboards and press releases. Their job, for now, is fielding all the complaints and making consistent all those rules.

Christopher Graham, Chairman of the European Advertising Standards Alliance (EASA), reacted quickly to Commissioner Byrne throwing out his own warning to advertisers: “If self-regulation isn't working in one country it's more likely that legislation will be implemented that applies to all.“ EASA proposes an alliance among national ad groups to reduce regulation through policing ad practices within the industry.

Regulators worry about the ever more blurred distinction between programs and ads. At a media conference on new ad techniques in March, media chairman of the German Media authority of North Rhine- Westphalia (LfM) Wolfgang Hahn-Cremer called for greater transparency, clarifying if not ending any confusion in a consumers mind between ads and programs.

Hahn-Cremer suggested “broadcasters' self-regulation across platforms along the lines of what has been achieved in the field of youth and media protection.”

The digital age has brought on new ad techniques, some rather controversial, as they raise again questions of deception. Advertisers are also concerned that the digital universe gives consumers more tools with which to escape their messages. The European Publishers Council supports self-regulation as an alternative to more regulation, as do most ad supported media, and are clear in their support of adapting ad rules to this digital reality.

Virtual ads, primarily in televised sporting events, replace signboards on the field with sponsored ads on television. Digital technology makes it possible. Splitting the screen during sporting events and placing ads on one side while the event continues on the other raised eyebrows among regulators. Both techniques have passed regulatory muster at present mostly due to a positive attitude toward self-regulation by advertisers and broadcasters.

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have generally not been receptive to any regulation on content, including advertising. In October Irish ISPs failed to sign on to a code of practice for safeguarding children.