http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/item/56647/254/260/3

<<
Icstis, the premium rate services regulator, is seeking an advertising agency ahead of plans to rebrand.

The regulator will be renamed PhonePayPlus (!!!???!!!) in October as part of move to become more relevant and proactive. (More competence would be a somewhat better aim)

Icstis is seeking an agency to handle all of its marketing and communications including consumer and trade campaigns. It has issued a tender ahead of the pitch, which will be led by head of communications Parool Patel.

Patel, who joined the regulator from agency Saatchi & Saatchi last month, says that PhonePayPlus will be a "modern regulatory body with a very clear remit for consumer protection".

[...]

Icstis director George Kidd has admitted the regulator had to be more proactive rather than react to problems as it had done in the past (MW March 15).

It accepts that it has low awareness levels among consumers and that opinion formers believe the name (which stands for the Independent Committee for the Supervision of Standards of the Telephone Information Services) is "meaningless".

The rebrand will also see the regulator introduce a raft of new consumer protection, youth education programmes and industry advertising campaigns that will focus on a "prevention rather than cure" approach for the industry in future.
>>

idb wrote on Jun 19^th, 2007 at 3:51pm:

The rebrand will also see the regulator introduce a raft of new consumer protection, youth education programmes and industry advertising campaigns that will focus on a "prevention rather than cure" approach for the industry in future.

Ah right. A bit like Phonebrain that tells the young that 087 is national rate and 0845 is local rate.......  ::) ::) ::) ::)

Prevention of most scams could be achieved by three simple processes:

1 - Require opt-in for telephone users for all 09X calls;
2 - Require opt-in for all reverse-billed SMS, or at least an opt-out facility (as T-mobile offers);
3 - Provide a mechanism for consumer refunds, similar to that provided in the USA.

Easy peasy.

ICSTIS will not do any of this as its 'industry' it protects will see a substantial revenue decrease.

ICSTIS is, and always has been, pro-scammer and anti-consumer.

A shockingly bad organization that needs to be liquidated at the first opportunity.

So, this ineffective quango announces it is going to spend a fortune on employing an advertising agency to assist in its 're-branding' so it can 'become more relevant and proactive' (yeah, right) on the same day that it's revealed that, last year alone, the government spent £2 billion on consultants!

Money well spent - NOT!

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/business/s/1010/1010469_phone_watchdogs_new_name.html

<<
A NEW name has been unveiled in Manchester for the premium rate telephone and text regulator which has recently criticised several TV companies over their phone competitions.

ICSTIS will become Phonepayplus in October, although the name change was given a `soft launch' this week.

Thousands of consumers have been cheated as a result of using telephone and text lines. Programmes which came under scrutiny included Blue Peter, GMTV and Richard and Judy.
[...]

Speaking exclusively to the Manchester Evening News, chairman Sir Alistair Graham said the new name for ICSTIS better reflected the role of the organisation and would help to end confusion about the industry and its regulator.

And, wait for it, the biggest lie in the telecomms industry:

"It recognises the fact that we are primarily here to protect the consumer," he said.

BULL.

[...]

>>

http://www.icstis.org.uk/pdfs_news/MediaRelease_annualreport0607.pdf


Key consumer information:

• From October, ICSTIS will change its name to the more consumer focused
name PhonePayPlus – the regulator of information and entertainment
charged to your phone.

• The new website will be www.phonepayplus.org.uk and consumers can
use ICSTIS’ freephone contact number 0800 500 212 to seek consumer
advice regarding premium rate services.

• An online number checking facility is also available for consumers to
double check which services are running on premium rate numbers. They
can check a number they have already dialled and also ascertain if a
premium rate number is currently under investigation the number checker
can be found at www.icstis.org.uk/numberchecker

ICSTIS Annual Report 2006/07

http://www.icstis.org.uk/publications/annual_report0607/

With the joke title "CREATING POSITIVE CHANGE".

(If anyone can find a user-friendly pdf or similar version, please post the link here!)

http://www.icstis.org.uk/pdfs_news/GKspeech_annualreport0607.pdf

ICSTIS ANNUAL REPORT 2006/7

George Kidd, Chief Executive

• Welcome to today’s launch of our Annual Report for what was an extremely busy and
eventful year.
• Ours is a ‘market’ defined by the “WAY to PAY”. Buying services charged to a phone
account is now an established feature of everyday life. From chat to charity to
Chelsea scores; and from ringtones to royal jubilee events.
The numbers
• The public spent about £1.2 billion on premium rate content last year. That is roughly
£25 for every adult in the UK.
• This figure could grow exponentially over the next three to five years – we will have
seen full digital switch-over, and we will be in a 3G, broadband, web-based world.
• Last year, nearly £400 million of total spend was on mobile services – over £1 million
a day.
• Nearly £200 million was spent on directory enquiry services and the remaining 52%
(over £600 million) on calls to 09 numbers.
• Premium rate services within broadcasting grew significantly to around £270 million –
this figure was boosted by the boom in Quiz TV channels, something that has
dropped away recently.
• Our complaint levels are down by 43% to just over 11,000. Interestingly, the recent
media coverage of various TV competitions and vote lines had little effect on the
overall level of complaints and did not provoke the massive influx seen in 2006 when
Big Brother received considerable media attention (and over 2,600 complaints to us).
Sir Alistair will talk more about this area shortly.
• However, complaint levels are a limited measure of public satisfaction or
dissatisfaction. Recent work carried out by the Office of Fair Trading suggests
generally that far less than 10% of those with a potential complaint get as far as the
appropriate body.
• We opened over 1,700 new investigations – an increase of 58% on the previous year.
This increase is largely due to the number of cases related to mobile subscription
services.
• In most cases, we could confirm, after checking, that the customer (often a child) had
signed up for a content service and that the service was run fairly.
• The increase also highlights our increased focus on monitoring services – spotting
and dealing with issues before consumer harm occurs.
• I can also report that 86% of all investigations are completed within 12 weeks.
• As a phone regulator, we should run a good quality contact centre. And we do.
• If you are calling about costly call delays, you do not want to face another one!
• This year, almost 90% of all calls to our Contact Centre were answered within 30
seconds.
The numbers we do not have – the ‘known unknowns’
• Kids do not complain. Nor do those who feel embarrassed by their actions, naiveté or
the relatively low level of individual financial loss.
• We need to look at how we can engage with these ‘invisible’ complainants.
• As a first step, we are looking to set up a non-premium rate text code to which
anyone can send queries and complaints.
Information and education
• Often just being there with information is enough to resolve user worries over phone
bills.
• Through our website and Contact Centre, we deal with about a million number
queries every year. Our text option will build on this service.
• Our other consumer initiative last year was Phonebrain – a website focused on kids
(especially those aged 9-13), and on how phone services and payments work.
• The reality is that 65% of 8-15-year-olds have mobile phones.
• And these are high capability phones with video, web access and more processing
capability than the moon shuttles.
• As part of the Childnet International’s work on ‘Know it All’ with the education
department, almost 250,000 CD-ROMs containing Phonebrain information have gone
out to our schools.
Partnerships
• Phonebrain highlights a simple fact. Protecting the public and building new markets is
a partnership business. No-one can succeed alone.
• We work with carriers on alert systems.
• We work with mobile networks on content classification to keep adult material from
kids.
• We work in a ‘joined at the hip’ way with Ofcom on broadcasting issues.
• We are building relations with the Gambling Commission, as we have already done
with the Information Commissioner, the ASA and others.
• We are hugely grateful for the knowledge businesses and trade bodies bring.
• There are some major challenges on the horizon with convergence.
• Ofcom’s forthcoming review of the scope of our regulatory remit is a necessary and
important health check. And changes in the regulation of 0871 numbers are sure to
bring in new issues.
• New emerging technologies and digital business models will require new solutions.
• I will now hand over to Sir Alistair Graham, Chairman of ICSTIS, to talk more about
what the future holds for us.

http://www.icstis.org.uk/pdfs_news/SAGspeech_annualreport0607.pdf

ICSTIS ANNUAL REPORT 2006/7
Sir Alistair Graham, Chairman
• Thank you George.
• This Annual Report coincides with the end of my first year as Chairman of ICSTIS
and, as George says, it has certainly been an eventful one.
• We have introduced a new regulatory Code and have been asked by Ofcom to
prepare to take on 0871 regulation early next year.
• We’ve also seen a dramatic growth and a great deal of media interest in premium rate
services used in television programmes. We estimate that this sector alone is now
worth some £270 million a year.
• The media has always been about ‘participation’. Technological limitations usually
meant it was one way – from producer to citizen.
• Technology now affords better and richer two-way transactional dialogue and that will
not go away. People have always been, and remain at heart, social beings – they
have always wanted to engage with others.
• Technology now makes it possible for mass audiences – and not just geeks with the
latest gadgets – to engage with events, bring their views to bear and even shape
outcomes.
• It is no surprise that viewers and listeners enjoy taking part using their phones. It is
easy to do – nearly everyone has access to a phone and the cost is generally low
enough to not cause ‘bill shock’.
• However, there is an important fact that must not be overlooked.
• When viewers or listeners transact and make a payment, the relationship between
them and the content provider surely changes. Viewers or listeners now become
‘consumers’.
• With that comes the whole issue of consumer protection. Consumers have rights to
get a ‘fair deal’.
• This is separate from their rights to enjoy a broadcast experience free from harm,
offence or which intrudes on their privacy or other rights.
• I doubt whether enough thought has been given to this point by broadcasters.
• Clearly there have been problems recently with the means of delivery of ‘participation’
in TV and radio when combined with a telephone and premium rate charging. It need
not be this way.
• Premium rate is not broke – nor is it inherently wrong. However, something went
wrong, and the intense media and political scrutiny that followed was not surprising.
• So why did these problems actually happen? How can it be that so many services
appeared to have so many basic failings which damaged consumer trust?
• This question is central to the Ofcom’s own inquiry into the apparent failings of the
industry’s compliance.
• We welcome this inquiry and look forward to its findings. I am sure it will provide an
invaluable insight and point the way for all parties to address the issues to prevent
problems happening again.
• It is in this context that I can offer some thoughts from ICSTIS’ perspective.
• I believe there are three issues that are particularly significant.
• Firstly, the value chain for the delivery of premium rate services used in TV and radio
is spread across a range of companies with different cultures and different priorities.
• In such a complex chain, it became possible for all parties to lose sight of the critical
need to retain viewer and listener trust. The apparent absence of clearly agreed and
written contracts only compounds the problem.
• Secondly, cost and revenue pressures in both the premium rate and broadcasting
sectors have been squeezed. Less emphasis appears to be placed on compliance
costs – indeed, ways may even have been found to reduce them.
• Thirdly, the focus seems to have been on making ‘good television and radio’ rather
than on ensuring that the premium rate element of it was delivered correctly.
• If the gallery needed votes counting in a matter of seconds so a winner could be
announced live, it is hardly surprising that corners were cut. It appears that ‘the show
went on regardless’.
• These issues – and there may be others – are systemic. To simply claim that the
recent problems are merely the result of human error or ‘cock up’ is to miss the point.
• If you consider the reputation risks and brand damage that can be caused if things go
wrong, any systemic failings will need to be properly addressed by the industry if it is
to move on. The headlines of recent months only serve to destroy brands and trust.
• This brings me to our recent consultation and the broader question of how future
regulation will seek to define participation media.
• Our consultation on proposals to introduce licensing for broadcast premium rate
services closed on 12 June. We had a wide range of responses and, for the most
part, respondents thought the concept of licensing had merit and accepted the case
for further regulatory action.
• The consultation also went wider – it attempted to unpack the issue of regulatory
responsibility. It recognised the fact that broadcasters and production companies, not
just service providers, are integral to the provision of content and may also be liable
for problems where they arise.
• We also made clear that any final measures we introduce are contingent on the
outcome of the Ofcom inquiry which I mentioned earlier.
• At the same time, we and Ofcom are investigating a number of cases. These may
present a further opportunity to learn about the nature of problems and how any
systemic failures arose.
• As you’ll no doubt be aware, Ofcom have taken action against the BBC and Five.
...

...
• We have also taken action, most notably with last week’s announcement of our
record fine imposed in the Richard and Judy You Say, We Pay case.
• The size of the fine reflects the very serious nature of the breach of our regulatory
Code. There was clear evidence of fundamental failings in the winner selection
process. Such a careless disregard for viewers is totally unacceptable.
• Viewers and consumers must always get a fair deal.
• We will now refer the case to Ofcom, who may wish to investigate the actions of the
parties involved under the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.
• This collaborative approach with Ofcom ties in with my last point.
• As participation media grows across all platforms, and often from remote destinations
and jurisdictions that don’t necessarily recognise the law of the land in which the
consumer is based, the challenge for regulators becomes more complex.
• Command and control regulation by a single regulator will not be enough.
• In a converging world, multiple regulators will exist in a defined space. All businesses,
not just the media, face this today. The issue must be how to best manage it rather
than go into denial.
• I believe that regulators with differing responsibilities need to find better ways to cooperate
across boundaries.
• At ICSTIS, we increasingly find ourselves collaborating with the likes of Ofcom, the
ASA, the Gambling Commission and the Information Commissioner.
• We have to collaborate if we are to be an effective regulator of a payment mechanism
that knows few technological or national boundaries.
• So will our need to engage lawmakers in both UK and the EU earlier in the legislative
process.
• Consumers and industry also need some certainties.
• Consumers need to know where to go with a problem. They need to properly advised
about who will be dealing with the issue. The ‘consumer pathway’ needs to be clearly
marked out and communicated back to them especially where multiple regulators are
involved.
• Similarly, broadcasters and others want certainty about what rules they need to
adhere to and what the consequences could be if there is a failure to comply.
• These strike me as perfectly reasonable requests.
• It also strikes me that, if we as regulators want to live up to best regulatory standards
and principles, we should deliver on these.
• The Better Regulation Commission says that there are five principles of regulation:
transparency, accountability, proportionality, consistency and targeted.
• The consumer and industry needs I just outlined are no more than a call for these
principles to be put into action between regulators.
• There is no doubt that the public thoroughly enjoys taking part in premium rate
competitions and votes on television.
• However, as well as being entertaining and fun, services should be reliable and
trustworthy.
• The public should be able to use these services with absolute confidence.
• Ensuring that happens is ICSTIS’ absolute priority.
[end]