Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A paid-for Facebook ad for Purelywave, seen 15 May 2020, featured a video which included onscreen text that stated “ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION SURROUNDS US AT ALL TIMES… THIS IS WHERE THE 7 CHAKRAS ORGANITE NECKLACE COMES IN TO HELP! MADE OUT OF 7 POWERFUL CRYSTALS, COPPER AND RESIN… EFFECTIVELY BLOCKS RADIATION FROM PHONE, TV, WIFI 4G AND SOON 5G! SIMPLY WEAR IT AND ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF: BETTER SLEEP QUALITY, BETTER CONCENTRATION, BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF EMOTIONAL STATE, IMPROVE COMPASSION AND INTERACTION… PROTECT YOURSELF FROM ONE OF THE LARGEST POLLUTION OF 21ST CENTURY!”.
The ad included a caption which stated “Did you know that EMF radiation from devices such as laptops & phones can be harmful? This orgone pendant is handmade from natural crystals and copper and has the ability to protect against EMF radiation”.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:
1. “Did you know that EMF radiation from devices such as laptops & phones can be harmful?”; and
2. “This orgone pendant is handmade from natural crystals and copper and has the ability to protect against EMF radiation”
Response
Pheka Agency Co Ltd did not respond to the ASA’s enquiries.Assessment
Upheld
The ASA was concerned by Pheka Agency Co Ltd’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
We considered consumers would understand the claims “Did you know that EMF radiation from devices such as laptops & phones can be harmful?” and “This orgone pendant is handmade from natural crystals and copper and has the ability to protect against EMF radiation” were an indication that EMF radiation from laptops and phones were harmful and that the advertiser’s product would help protect from that radiation. However, we received no evidence from the advertiser to substantiate those claims.
In the absence of such evidence, we concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and were therefore misleading. The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Pheka Agency Co Ltd not to state or imply that EMF radiation from laptops and phones were harmful and that their product would provide protection from that radiation without adequate substantiation. We referred the matter to CAP’s Compliance team.
