Irene Gregory Says Trust, Not Compliance, Should Drive Marketing

Compliance is not a marketing strategy, trust is, says Irene Gregory, CEO of the IMM Institute (Image supplied)

These types of complaints spanned fast-moving consumer goods, banking, telecoms, healthcare, travel, quick service restaurants, as well as energy and utilities.

Misleading claims are not limited to outright falsehoods but may also come about because of omission, ambiguity, inaccuracy, exaggeration or the overall impression created by an advertisement.

This is an aspect of the code that is a thread throughout complaints lodged against advertisers, mostly by consumers with a ratio of five to one based on an analysis of a sample of the ARB’s rulings.

The Board has repeatedly made it clear that it won’t tolerate marketing that claims to have specific attributes and cannot substantiate these, misleading the consumer in the process.

In the consumer’s position

A recent case in which a consumer complained that a consumer goods manufacturer had misrepresented a product – by saying it was wholly natural while stating that other ingredients were part of the formulation – is a primary example.

The ARB put itself in the consumer’s position and said that shoppers could reasonably assume that the whole product is 100% plant-based or that the only active ingredient is plant-based.

While not determining any validity about the claimed natural products because ingredients are governed by different regulations, the ARB said that just putting the fact that there are other non-plant-based ingredients on the back of the packaging was confusing at best, and misleading at worst because consumers shouldn’t have to hunt key information out on the back of the packaging.

Because of this, the packaging breached the Code of Advertising Practice, which prohibits advertising that is likely to mislead consumers.

How consumers shop

Rather than asking whether an advertiser could technically defend every word or provide supporting evidence after the fact, the ARB consistently examined the message created by the advertisement as a whole.

Headlines, imagery, packaging, qualifications and omissions are assessed because that is how consumers experience marketingcommunications in the real world.

Modern consumers don’t dissect advertisements line by line but make quick judgements based on the overall message a brand communicates when working their way down shopping aisles, buying online, or booking a holiday.

Increasingly, the ARB’s decisions reflect that reality, placing emphasis on consumer understanding rather than advertiser intention.

International standards

The code it enforces is also not arbitrary – drawn from global standards set by the International Chamber of Commerce, it carries real regulatory weight.

The ARB’s ability to enforce the code on its more than 300 members is grounded in case law.

Two landmark cases decided in the Supreme Court of Appeal involving a wellness company as well as a consumer product entity in separate matters confirmed that the ARB has jurisdiction to consider complaints against any advertiser, regardless of membership.

When one company asked for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court, it was refused, entrenching the ARB’s status as an industry watchdog.

While rulings against non-members are not legally binding on them directly, ARB members can be forced to withdraw non-compliant advertising and, if they fail to do so, the ARB can issue an Ad Alert – an instruction to members in the media sector to pull, or refuse to run, the advert.

Communicating transparently

Some notable rulings in recent years include a complaint that a company didn’t visibly notify consumers that some promotions were online only, and another against a car brand for a television advertisement that failed to clearly disclose key financial terms and conditions, with the ARB requiring members to refuse the ad until it did.

The car brand ruling will have had direct commercial consequences, while every other advertiser that has fallen foul of the ARB – especially repeat offenders – risks reputation damage that no disclaimer can undo.

Effective communication begins long before a legal review and mere compliance should never be the end goal.

The strongest campaigns are those that leave little room for misunderstanding because they communicate with clarity from the outset, rather than relying on explanations, disclaimers or technical wording to correct an unintended impression.

Responsible marketing isn’t about crafting the cleverest message. It’s about communicating transparently, accurately and authentically in a way that consumers understand.

Because trust is built when brands consistently meet the expectations they create – and trust is what ultimately secures a lasting place in the hearts and minds of consumers.