Unbridled misleading and deceptive advertising is not to be tolerated for long.
This is the clear signal from the Consumer Council in a campaign to canvass public opinion and support in bringing advertisements in the non-broadcast media under control.
In a public consultation paper which the Council published today, it sets out five specific options covering the whole spectrum of regulatory regimes of both statutory and voluntary.
It is the first public consultation exercise ever undertaken by the Council on an issue of growing importance to Hong Kong which is regarded as the advertising capital of Asia.
The Council's Chairperson, Ms. Anna WU, a strong advocate for truth in advertising, is critical of advertising that misleads or deceives.
The prevalence of dubious advertising is borne out in a recent large-scale survey of the Council on advertisements for seven categories of product and service groups which appeared in both the print and broadcast media.
The samples were compared against established standards and codes, locally and abroad, and the results are quite alarming:
- In the TV ads, 58 (22.7%) of the 256 samples were found to contain questionable claims while in the newspaper and periodical ads, 913 (51.4%) of the 1,777 samples had the same problem.
- Real property ads (92%) topped the list of most questionable claims, followed by beauty and fitness (slimming) services (85%), medicines, health food and therapies (84%), cosmetics and beauty products (82%), tutorial and training services (18%), travel services (12%).
The absence of truth in advertising, said Ms. Anna WU, strikes at the root of consumer dissatisfaction. Consumers may not realise and complain about advertising but they do complain about goods and services not living up to their expectations. Often the problem could be traced to advertising that does not tell the truth.
Despite its reputation as the advertising capital of Asia, Hong Kong is lagging behind many of the developed economies in the protection of public interest against misleading advertising.
The consultation exercise will help the Council to effectively formulate the approach and system of control most appropriate and beneficial to the advertising industry and the public whom advertising aims to reach. The proposed reform will then be submitted to the Government for consideration.
Ms. Wu assured that any regulatory option would not stifle creativity in advertising. Nor would it become a form of censorship to control freedom of expression.
It would remove the anomaly of double standards which now exists between the broadcast media which is subject to control by a Code of Practice issued by the Broadcasting Authority, and the non-broadcast media where there is virtually none of the regulatory safeguards that apply for the former.
Applying the same standard to both broadcast and non-broadcast advertising is also conducive to fair competition in the marketplace.
The options set out in the consultation paper, each with its pros and cons, are not mutually exclusive. The desirable method may be a combination of two or more of these options or suggestions from outside sources.
Option 1
Amending current legislation for effective regulation of advertising practices.
For example, amending the Trade Descriptions Ordinance to prohibit misleading information on services, real property or prices and the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance to prohibit the use of physical force or undue harassment or coercion in relation to the supply or possible supply of goods or services to consumers. This will also have the effect of curtailing bait-and-switch tactics as traders must supply the goods or services at the price indicated. Others include the Undesirable Medical Advertisements Ordinance, and the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance to bring advertisements of health and slimming food under control.
Option 2
Enacting a piece of specific legislation to control deceptive and misleading advertisements.
Examples are the UK Control of Misleading Advertisements Regulations 1988 and the Advertising Law of the People's Republic of China.
Option 3
Enacting a piece of new legislation to deal with unfair trade practices including, but not restricting to, deceptive and misleading advertising claims.
For example, in Australia, the Trade Practices Act deals with consumer protection, competition and fair trade. Part of this Act has provisions for specific prohibitions against unfair practices, misleading or deceptive conduct including misleading advertising and bait-and-switch tactics.
Option 4
Maintaining the existing self-regulation system which works on the basis of voluntary participation of the market players.
The advertising industry all over the world has taken positive steps to promote and organize self-regulation. The Association of Accredited Advertising Agents of Hong Kong and the Travel Industry Council, for example, have codes of practice governing advertising standards of their members.
Option 5
Establishing a statutory independent Advertising Standards Authority for industry-wide self-regulation.
In many jurisdictions, self-regulation of the advertising industry goes hand-in-hand with some forms of statutory regulation. The Council proposes that the Government should enact a piece of legislation to provide for the establishment of an Advertising Standards Authority to administer a self-regulation system. To be effective, the Authority should be empowered to, inter alia, allow participation of all market players concerned and independent persons; levy surcharges on advertising to fund the operation of the Authority; prescribe codes of practice for advertising and sales promotion; police non-compliance of the prescribed codes; and investigate complaints and conduct research.
Members of the public are invited to put forward their views on these options.
The full report is available for download from the Council's website.
Written views may be addressed to Consumer Council at 22/F., K. Wah Centre, 191 Java Road, North Point, Hong Kong or sent to the Council by email at Feedback cc@consumer.org.hk before October 31.