Print This Post
Advertiser: Urban Brewing
Medium: Internet (Social Media)
ASAI Code 7th Edition: 2.4(c), 4.1, 4.4, 5.33
A Twitter post by Urban Brewing referred to the following:
“Tell us what you want to see us brew next to win a brewery tour and brunch for 4 this Sunday. Send us the coolest ideas you have, and we will choose the winner on Friday!”
The complainant said he entered the competition with four other Twitter account users and no winner was announced. When he queried why there had been no winner to the competition he was informed that as only one entry had been received the advertisers had decided to rerun the competition in the coming weeks.
The complainant said that the advertisers subsequently offered him an alternative prize which he did not consider to be of the same value and he did not respond to their offer.
The complainant said he considered the advertising to be misleading as the advertisers had not fulfilled their promise in relation to the prize referenced.
The advertisers said they ran two competitions, one on Twitter and one on another social media platform. They said it appeared to be the case that the competition on Twitter received only one entry and it was decided to rerun the competition. When they checked a different device, however, it appeared that more than one entry had been received.
The advertisers said they had been contacted by an individual who considered they should have won the competition. They explained their thinking to the individual in relation to postponing the competition but the individual was unhappy. They then offered the individual a similar prize but did not receive a response to their offer.
The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaint and the advertisers’ response.
The Committee noted that there had been no indication given that the number of entries received would be taken into account in deciding the winner to the competition or that a low entry level would result in the competition being extended or reorganised.
As the prize had not been awarded, the Committee concluded that the advertising was misleading and in breach of Sections 4.1 and 5.33 of the Code.
Terms and conditions for promotions should be developed and referenced in advertising for future promotions.