Ad description
Two ads for Vodafone seen on 9 December 2024:
a. A TV ad depicted various Christmas scenes, set in the past, with the protagonists using mobile phone technology from each era. The ad ended with on-screen text that stated “Connecting you at Christmas for 40 years” whilst smaller text at the bottom of the screen stated, “The Nation’s Network: Vodafone UK, supporting the nation since 1984, learn more: vodafone.co.uk/network” before the scene cut to the Vodafone Logo, and the claim “The Nation’s Network”, whilst the voice-over also stated, “Connecting you at Christmas for 40 years, Vodafone, The Nation’s Network”.
b. Claims on www.vodafone.co.uk/network were headed “Connecting you this Christmas on The Nation’s Network”. Text stated, “We’re here to connect you to the people and things you love on our reliable, award-winning network”. There were links to “Check coverage” and “Switch to us”. Small text stated, “The Nation’s Network: Vodafone UK, supporting the nation since 1984” and linked to “Full verification”. Bold text alongside stated, “The Nation’s Network”. Text further down the web page in a sub-section stated, “Why we're The Nation's Network Since 1984, we've gone from strength to strength to support the nation. Today, we're proud to call ourselves The Nation's Network” and listed “Firsts in the telecommunication industry”, “Supporting our emergency services” and “Reliable, award-winning network”. Text in another sub-section of the web page stated, “Staying connected on The Nation's Network We're helping you stay connected, whether you're at home or travelling” and listed “99% UK home coverage”, “international roaming” and “our growing 5G network”.
Issue
EE, who believed the “The Nation’s Network” was an implied comparative superiority claim, challenged whether the ads were misleading.
Response
Vodafone Ltd t/a Vodafone said their claim “The Nation’s Network” was in reference to their heritage as the UK’s first and most long-standing mobile telephone network. They said ad (a) referenced that Vodafone had been providing services for 40 years, and both ads contained references to 1984, the year when Vodafone was founded.
They also said the claim intended to highlight their heritage as a UK brand, which provided services to the country, the emergency services and their presence at important cultural and sporting events.
They said ad (a) and (b) were both ads about their heritage. They believed neither ad made a comparative claim nor identified a competitor. The claim “The Nation’s Network” did not contain either an adjective to describe an attribute or a point of comparison. Also, there was neither a competitor named in the ads nor an express or implied reference to a competitor, or a global claim against the rest of the market. They believed that the definite article in the claim referred to the nation, not the network. They said there was no adjective in the claim to expressly or impliedly describe the network.
They believed ad (a) clearly provided the context that the claim was in relation to their heritage, both in terms of the visual storytelling of Vodafone’s services since 1984, and the text “The Nation’s Network: Vodafone UK, supporting the nation since 1984, learn more: Vodafone.co.uk”. They said the website, to which the ad linked, provided further context for their claim.
They said that although ad (b) included references to various features of their network, as above, because they believed that use of the definitive article in their claim referred to the nation and not the network, they did not consider that the claim made a comparison to competitors. They said the average consumer would have been aware that there were a number of other telephony service providers in the UK, but that the references on their ad to “international roaming” or “our growing 5G network” would not have been understood to be a claim that Vodafone was the only network that offered international roaming or 5G. They further said that the web page was divided into separate sections and considered there was suitable context regarding their heritage in the sections where the claim appeared. They said they did not reference “The Nations Network” in sections of the website which were specific to their network and product offerings.
Vodafone also provided a document from a third-party market research company. The document, which contained an assessment of the most valuable UK brands in 2024, recognised Vodafone as the most valuable UK telecoms provider, and UK brand overall, which they said evidenced that over the last 40 years they had established themselves as the Nation’s Network.
At a late stage of the investigation, Vodafone provided additional consumer research, conducted by a different third party. The research was a study of 287 respondents who were asked two questions, after viewing ad (b) in its entirety. The first question asked participants to describe what they felt was being shown in ad (b). They were asked: “You have just seen an advert for Vodafone. In your own words, can you explain what was shown in the ad?” The second question asked respondents what came to mind when they heard the phrase “The Nation’s Network”, again after viewing ad (b). The results for both answers were grouped by response themes.
Vodafone believed that this research showed that 83% of respondents disagreed when asked specifically to consider if they had interpreted “The Nation’s Network” as a network superiority claim, and that 83% did not associate the “The Nation’s Network” with an implied comparative superiority claim in ad (b). Vodafone considered that this research disproved that at least a significant minority of consumers were likely to interpret the claim as being an objective comparative claim against the UK’s other networks.
In relation to ad (a), Clearcast believed the claim was not a comparative claim against other broadband providers and were satisfied with the information provided by Vodafone. They therefore did not believe the ad was misleading.
Assessment
Upheld in relation to ad (b) only
The ASA acknowledged that Vodafone intended the claim “The Nation’s Network” in the ads to refer to their heritage and current operations as a UK brand, which included providing network services to the UK, such as for the emergency services and at well-known UK events, and not as a comparative superiority claim.
In relation to ad (a), we considered that viewers would have likely understood the claim “The Nation’s Network” within the context of the visuals and scenario presented across the various scenes of mobile technology being used from different eras, and the text “Connecting you at Christmas for 40 years” and “supporting the nation since 1984” to be in relation to Vodafone’s history and heritage. We considered it was unlikely that consumers would have interpreted the claim presented within that context to be an objective comparative claim against Vodafone’s competitors. We therefore concluded that in ad (a), where sufficient contextual information was given for the basis of the claim, “The Nation’s Network” was not misleading.
In ad (b), the claim “The Nation’s Network” appeared in a banner at the top of the website, next to text that stated, “Connecting you this Christmas on The Nation’s Network We’re here to connect you to the people and things you love on our reliable, award-winning network”. Whilst there were some references to Vodafone’s heritage further down the page, for example, text explaining some of their “firsts” in the telecommunications industry, their support of the emergency services and a timeline of Vodafone’s history at the bottom of the page, there were also references to Vodafone’s reliability and coverage. These included, “We’ve won numerous awards for keeping you connected”, “We’re here to keep you connected”, “staying connected on The Nation's Network We're helping you stay connected, whether you're at home or travelling”,“99% UK home coverage “Check coverage” and “Switch to us”.
The ad did not refer to Vodafone being recognised as the most valuable UK telecoms provider and the most valuable UK brand overall in 2024, by the third-party market research company referred to in Vodafone’s response. We therefore considered that consumers were unlikely to interpret “The Nation’s Network” in that context.
We therefore considered that in ad (b) there was not a clear contextual basis for the claim “The Nation’s Network”.
In the absence of a clear explanation for the basis of the claim in ad (b), we considered that there were several possible consumer interpretations for it. For example, we considered that some consumers might understand that Vodafone were expressing their subjective view that they were “the Nation’s Network” because they were a UK-based network, which had provided services to the UK since 1984. However, we considered at least a significant minority of consumers were likely to interpret the claim as being an objective comparative claim against the UK’s other network providers. We noted, for example, the ad did not state Vodafone was “one of the nation’s networks”, or “a network serving the nation”, which would be unlikely to be considered as comparative, depending on the context in which they appeared.
One such interpretation, that we considered that at least a significant minority of consumers were likely to hold, was that Vodafone was more popular than, or had more customers than, other networks that also provided broadband and telecoms services to UK consumers.
We also considered that at least a significant minority of consumers were likely to view the claim in the context of ad (b), which contained references to reliability and coverage, to mean that Vodafone was the nation’s network because it was more reliable, had superior coverage to or offered better connectivity than other network providers.
The CAP Code required that comparisons with identifiable competitors must objectively compare one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features of those products. As such, we expected the ad to objectively compare one or more verifiable features. Because we considered that the claim, as it was presented in ad (b), was likely to be understood by consumers in a range of ways (including as a comparison against all other UK networks, for example that Vodafone was the most popular network in the UK, had the most customers or had better coverage or reliability than its competitors), we considered the ad failed to objectively compare one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features and concluded that the claim “The Nation’s Network”, as it appeared in ad (b), breached the Code.
We also considered market research submitted by Vodafone. The ASA Council noted that rule 1.7 of the CAP Code stated that “Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code”. The ASA Council considered that Vodafone’s submission of consumer research in this case was at a very late stage of the investigation, and did not provide evidence for Vodafone’s argument that the average consumer would not associate the ‘’The Nation’s Network’’ with an implied comparative superiority claim.
The ASA considered that the themes measured in outcome 1 suggested that the participants felt that the ad was showing things that could reasonably be viewed, as objectively measurable factors with a potential comparative element. For example, 10% of respondents were grouped in the theme “info about Vodafone services and products”, 7% in “network reliability”, 6% in “affordable pricing”. We noted that this question did not ask specifically about the claim “The Nation’s Network”.
We considered that the results in outcome 2 suggested the claim was potentially interpreted by a significant minority of participants (39%) as being about specific objectively measurable features or characteristics of Vodafone’s service, such as the 8% grouped in “Customer satisfaction”, 25% in “Vodafone’s coverage”, 3% in “Telco/service quality”, and the 3% in Broadband services.
The questions did not specifically ask about comparability, and the research outcomes did not provide evidence that participants did not associate “The Nation’s Network” as a superiority claim, as Vodafone suggested. We considered that the research was not sufficient to provide a basis for suggesting that the average consumer would not associate the ‘’The Nation’s Network’’ with an implied comparative superiority claim, as argued by Vodafone. Therefore, our assessment remained that at least a significant minority of consumers were likely to interpret the claim “the Nation’s Network” as being an objective comparative claim against the UK’s other network providers.
Ad (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 3.35 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors).
We also investigated ad (a) under BCAP Code rules 3.1 (Misleading Advertising), 3.33 and 3.35 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors), but did not find it in breach.
Action
Ad (b) must not appear again in the form complained about. We told Vodafone Ltd to ensure they objectively compared one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features if making an implied comparative claim.
No further action necessary in respect of ad (a).
