Cellular2.06.2016

We’re sorry our best effort wasn’t good enough: Cell C

Cell C network billboard

Cell C was in hot water with the Advertising Standards Authority of South Africa (ASA) recently for not removing billboards with misleading claims.

In April, the ASA ruled that Cell C’s claim of having the widest network coverage in South Africa was misleading.

Cell C was instructed to withdraw the claim immediately, within deadlines stipulated in the ASA’s Procedural Guide.

Vodacom, which lodged the ASA complaint against Cell C, lodged another complaint on 18 May – stating that Cell C had not removed a number of its “widest coverage” billboards.

Vodacom said the claims were also still used in Cell C stores in Tygervalley and Canal Walk in Cape Town.

Cell C explains

Cell C responded, saying the ruling had far-reaching effects on its marketing – which involved multiple advertising mediums.

Cell C said on receipt of the ruling, it immediately put in place a strategy to apply the withdrawal.

This included removing the “widest network coverage” claims from billboards, branded cars, radio, television, and in-store marketing.

Cell C said it requested an urgent update from its providers on 13 May, as it noticed not all billboards had been updated as instructed.

“We set out to comply with the ASA’s requirements in both the letter and the spirit. Insofar as any failures to meet specific deadlines, such instances were beyond our control and should not attract a sanction,” said Cell C.

ASA ruling

The ASA said it is not clear why Cell C only followed up on its compliance on 13 May, when the deadline for withdrawal was 28 April.

“There is also nothing in the correspondence submitted to the ASA to suggest that the instruction to change or remove existing material was issued before 21 April 2016,” said the ASA.

The ASA agreed with Vodacom that Cell C had the sanctioned advertising subsequent to the appropriate deadlines, which constituted a breach of the original ruling.

“However, the information submitted by the respondent suggests a concerted effort to comply, and not a callous disregard as the complainant appears to perceive it.”

The ASA ruled that Cell C breached the original ruling, but did not impose additional sanctions against the company.

More on cellular operators

Vodacom, Cell C and Telkom ditch consumer protection ombudsman

Best and worst tech companies in South Africa

Mobile operators tested: Best and worst email support

Show comments

Latest news

More news

Trending news

Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter