Download Full Decision

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Richard Price wikipedia , lookup

Ethics in religion wikipedia , lookup

Sam Harris wikipedia , lookup

The Moral Landscape wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
10/105
DECISION
Chairman’s Ruling
9 March 2010
Complaint 10/105
Complainant: R. Harris
Advertisement: Kirkcaldie and Stains
Complaint: The Kirkcaldie and Stains newspaper advertisement was headed:
KIRKCALDIE & STAINS
SALE On Now
UP TO 50% OFF
So go on, treat yourself… we’ll go halves
The advertisement also contained an extensive list of various products with the
corresponding sale price recorded next to it, some of which showed a discount of
50%, and some showing a lesser discount.
Complainant, R. Harris, said: “ ‘We’ll go halves’ really means everything must be
50% off, yet they say ‘Up to 50% off’ which indicates that not everything is half price.
Very misleading.”
The relevant provision was Rule 2 of the Code of Ethics.
The Chairman noted the Complainant, R. Harris’ concern that the advertisement
was misleading where it said “we’ll go halves” as they were of the view that this
implied that all sale items were discounted by 50%. The Chairman accepted this
interpretation of the text “We’ll go halves” but was of the view that the overall
message regarding the sale discounts was clear in the advertisement. She noted
that the fact that everything was not discounted by 50% was made clear in the a
advertisement through the text, as also noted by the Complainant, which said “Up to
50% off” (emphasis added). She also noted the advertisement contained a
comprehensive list of items on sale and their respective discounts, which showed
that, while some items were discounted by 50%, many were discounted by a lesser
amount. She said there was no apparent breach of Rule 2 of the Code of Ethics,
and accordingly ruled that there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed.
Chairman’s Ruling: Complaint No Grounds to Proceed