Toothless watchdoggy growls.

[thirdcrank]

Shock, horror. The generally useless Advertising Standards Authority has checked the HC and banned a car advert (retrospectively, of course.)

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/peu ... spartanntp

[tod28]

The ASA can only act retrospectively as until the advert is aired or published their code hasn't been breached.

[Pete Owens]

Surely it is illegal to install such a device - let alone advertise it.

[thirdcrank]

The ASA can only act retrospectively as until the advert is aired or published their code hasn't been breached.

That's pretty much the reason I posted and worded it as I did.

IMO most of the omsbuddies and toothless watch doggies are a waste of time, doing little more than provide sinecures for our betters, a bit like the established church in the days of Anthony Trollope.

They do say that any publicity is good publicity and that's exactly what the ASA offers. Run a dodgy ad and if anybody complains it gets aired again in way which tends to attract more attention than it did the first time round.

[AlaninWales]

Surely it is illegal to install such a device - let alone advertise it.

No more illegal than installing a radio or music system (as Peugeot note, the distraction is of the same order), which is why the HC uses these as examples of distracting activities to avoid. Of course 'we' (as a society) have been ignoring the fact that these are distractions for decades.

[Psamathe]

The ASA can only act retrospectively as until the advert is aired or published their code hasn't been breached.

That's pretty much the reason I posted and worded it as I did.

IMO most of the omsbuddies and toothless watch doggies are a waste of time, doing little more than provide sinecures for our betters, a bit like the established church in the days of Anthony Trollope.

They do say that any publicity is good publicity and that's exactly what the ASA offers. Run a dodgy ad and if anybody complains it gets aired again in way which tends to attract more attention than it did the first time round.

If an ad is banned (after the campaign) does the advertiser suffer any significant penalty or do they just get a letter to be filed in the round filing cabinet?

Seems that a company wishing a questionable campaign can go ahead without risk as chances are the campaign will be over by the time the ASA act and they will have achieved their aims (promoting something).

Maybe if watchdogs were obliged to impose significant fines (and provide an optional advance approval service should companies wish to check their ideas). Not the option to fine £0-£minimal but e.g. minimum at cost of campaign*10 (or more). Maybe for printed materials based on publication distribution, for billboards based on some other measure ... but significant costs. Maybe also an equal prominence apology (same medium, same time, same size/duration, etc.)

I can't see any reason why watchdogs cannot be made effective. Maybe it's a bit like road legislation enforcement - if you are unlikely to get caught or even if you are caught there is no punishment them there is little to stop you. start enforcing rules with significant penalties then people might start paying attention to the rules a bit more.

Ian

[Nigel]

Surely it is illegal to install such a device - let alone advertise it.

No more illegal than installing a radio or music system (as Peugeot note, the distraction is of the same order), which is why the HC uses these as examples of distracting activities to avoid. Of course 'we' (as a society) have been ignoring the fact that these are distractions for decades.

Perfectly legal for a passenger to use it whilst the vehicle is being driven, assuming the controls can be reached without interfering with the driver. Or can be used when safely parked. Much as a car audio system with its complex connection to smartphone, or a sat nav.

If an ad is banned (after the campaign) does the advertiser suffer any significant penalty or do they just get a letter to be filed in the round filing cabinet?

A "don't do it again" letter.
If the advertiser is really persistent and actually breaching a law somewhere, then the ASA might pass the file to either Trading Standards or, for TV/Radio, Ofcom.

In theory, broadcast adverts are "pre-vetted" to ensure they meet the code, but sometimes stuff gets through, and a ban only happens after viewers complain.

Seems that a company wishing a questionable campaign can go ahead without risk as chances are the campaign will be over by the time the ASA act and they will have achieved their aims (promoting something).

The ASA is a trade body for the Advertising Industry.


- Nigel

[Pete Owens]

Surely it is illegal to install such a device - let alone advertise it.

No more illegal than installing a radio or music system (as Peugeot note, the distraction is of the same order),

Nonsense, Reading texts is vastly distracting in a way that listening to music isn't.

The analogy would be reading the morning paper or watching a movie while attempting to drive.

[RickH]

Surely it is illegal to install such a device - let alone advertise it.

No more illegal than installing a radio or music system (as Peugeot note, the distraction is of the same order),

Nonsense, Reading texts is vastly distracting in a way that listening to music isn't.

The analogy would be reading the morning paper or watching a movie while attempting to drive.

Unless I'm mistaken (not uncommon) the system speaks the message so you don't have to physically read them & also responds to voice so you don't have to type replies.

[thirdcrank]

... Unless I'm mistaken (not uncommon) the system speaks the message so you don't have to physically read them & also responds to voice so you don't have to type replies.

So long as you are not at the wheel take a look at the picture linked in my OP which shows the text message displayed as text on the "infotainment" screen. In that example, it's quite brief, but there's nothing to stop it being longer.

[Tangled Metal]

It's a screen with texts on. Even if it reads them out for you I bet you'll look at the screen too.

[AlaninWales]

No more illegal than installing a radio or music system (as Peugeot note, the distraction is of the same order),

Nonsense, Reading texts is vastly distracting in a way that listening to music isn't.

The analogy would be reading the morning paper or watching a movie while attempting to drive.

Unless I'm mistaken (not uncommon) the system speaks the message so you don't have to physically read them & also responds to voice so you don't have to type replies.

My last car had the facility to do that (it gave you the choice between displaying them between the speedometer and tachometer, or reading them to you. If they were long and required any concentration (basically any message other than 'please call me when you are free' or 'got your message' etc) they were potentially distracting even when read out by the infotainment system.
Research has shown that anything which engages your concentration, anything which requires you to visualise, anything which requires you to store or access memories, will distract you from the current task. Humans have a limited ability to pay attention and paying attention to multiple things divides that limited ability. Some people will find some music relaxing (for some it will be too relaxing), others will find the same music engages visual memories (which use the same portion of the brain that is used to process what is outside the windscreen). Listening to a radio show frequently involves seeing the participants 'in the mind's eye'; Following plays will involve storing and retrieving memories. All have been shown to detract from the ability to control the machine we are driving.
Personally I use the infotainment on quiet motorway/dual carriageway stretches where instant reactions will not be required and turn it off where the traffic builds up (unless it has stopped) and when driving through urban areas or country lanes, where potential interactions are frequent.