terryhickmott wrote on Jan 30
th, 2009 at 8:24pm:
"it is widely recognised that calls to these numbers are charged at local rate."
Definitely worth a complaint, but an interesting case. We will object whichever way the ASA decides.
If the complaint is upheld, this would imply that there is not widespread misunderstanding caused by use of the phrase "local rate". Despite the ASA's efforts, this is untrue. There is widespread misunderstanding.
If the complaint is rejected, this would imply that the ASA has given up on its job and accepts that there will always be widespread misunderstanding.
terryhickmott wrote on Jan 30
th, 2009 at 8:24pm:
Who's allowing them to get away with this stuff???
One could ask, who is allowing us to get away with pointing out numerous cases of people believing that calls to revenue sharing numbers are charged at local rate?
It is widely recognised that calls to local numbers are charged at a particular "local rate". Would reference to this widespread mistaken impression be a breach of the ASA code?
Yes, we must must attack those who seek to exploit this public misunderstanding, but perhaps our primary mission should be to correct it. The greatest success is likely to be found with those who promote the misunstanding unwittingly, because they genuinely share it. Action must be taken against the deliberate liars and cheats whenever possible, but they will never be totally eliminated.