ASA slams The Telegraph over Michelin article
31 Dec 2015
The UK advertising watchdog, the Advertising Standards Authority has ruled that a Michelin article and a video on telegraph.co.uk failed to make it clear they had been paid for.
The agency further ruled that the page and embedded video on the news site was not obviously identifiable to readers as an advertisement.
The advertorial featured in August, compared the company's tyres with an unspecified budget brand, concluding that premium tyres improved safety and performance in wet conditions over the cheaper version.
The statements on the page included phrases such as "performance driving news" and "As part of the Telegraph's recent Performance Driving Day, in association with Michelin".
A reader, who believed the ad implied Michelin tyres would always outperform budget alternatives, in spite of a number of budget versions having a higher braking performance rating as compared with some made by Michelin, complained that the ad was misleading.
The ASA also investigated whether the ad could be identified as such.
According to Michelin, racing driver Ben Collins, who conducted the test, gave an unscripted explanation of his experience and "represented a genuine and honest expression of his opinion of the performance of the tyres".
According to Michelin, the video and text did not attempt to imply that their tyres would always outperform budget tyres.
In its defence The Telegraph contended that visual and written cues, such as the words ''in association with Michelin'' suggested there was a financial arrangement.
However, according to the ASA, the labelling was ''insufficient to identify the content specifically as an ad'' rather than sponsored editorial, over which the newspaper retained control.
According to commentators, publishers are finding it increasingly difficult to grapple with the issue of labelling of sponsored and paid-for articles. They say, with revenues from traditional print and display advertising online, publishers are forced to resort to ''native'' advertising that looks like editorial to make up for lost revenue.
