|
"Green" Claims in Advertising: The
Legal Issues
For many years the health and beauty industries have had to comply
with legal restrictions relating to claims that extol the health
benefits of a particular product or cosmetic. A similar approach
is now being taken to advertisements that use such terms as "green",
"carbon neutral", "environmentally friendly", "eco", "renewable"
and "sustainable".
Concerns regarding climate change, fuel costs, scarcity and global
warming influence the purchase choices that some consumers and businesses
make. Different industries now focus more on the environmentally
friendly aspects of their offerings when advertising. Care needs
to taken when describing technology, products, services or processes,
entities in "green" terms. These claims should not be used in a
manner that is misleading, inaccurate and or that is not grounded
in fact. Otherwise they may be seen to be engaging in what more
cynical commentators have described as "green washing".
Those focusing on the "green" aspects of their services or products
will need to be aware of the legal requirements of any "green" claims.
Regulators such as the National Consumer Agency may take issue with
advertising copy and competitors may also use the law to prevent
certain advertisements being displayed or aired or to require changes
to be made to them. Legal cases involving advertising can be publicly
embarrassing, damage goodwill and the brand and of course can be
costly for those involved.
Bord Gais Energy Challenge to Airtricity's "Green Electricity"
Campaign
The recent successful legal complaints in relation to Airtricity
advertisements are a good example, illustrating the legal issues
in this area. Airtricity ran a campaign which not only informed
consumers that switching to Airtricity would help save "trees",
"bunny rabbits", "our future" and "a lot of money", but which also
described the electricity as "green electricity" and compared the
offering to ESB and Bord Gais in environmental terms.
Bord Gais Energy, competitors of Airtricity in the Irish residential
electricity market, successfully complained to the Advertising Standards
Authority of Ireland (ASAI) about Airtricity the press and radio
advertisements.
"Green Electricity"
In addition to complaints which dealt with the manner in which
price savings were highlighted, the Bord Gais complaints also concerned
the use of the words "green electricity" in the Airtricity advertisement
copy, and the claim that its offering was five times "more environmentally
friendly" than that of Bord Gais.
Bord Gais argued that it was misleading to describe the electricity
as being "green electricity". It pointed to the fact that only 79%
of the Airtricity electricity is generated from renewable or "green"
sources while 21% of its fuel mix was from fossil or "brown sources".
Airtricity countered this argument with a detailed analysis of the
use of the word "green" in Ireland, analysing both its colloquial
use and its use in regulatory licensing regimes.
The ASAI upheld the Bord Gais complaint. The ASAI reasoned that
as not all of Airtricity's electricity was derived from renewable
sources, the unqualified claim that the electricity was "green electricity"
was inappropriate.
Five Times "More Environmentally Friendly"
The second aspect of the "green challenge" by Bord Gais was that
the Airtricity advertisement claimed that the electricity was be
five times "more environmentally friendly" than that of Bord Gais.
This claim was based on the percentage of the Airtricity fuel mix
made up of brown fuel when compared to Bord Gais'. Bord Gais claimed
that the type of fossil fuel used by Airtricity to generate the
non renewable portion was in fact more damaging and polluting than
the fossil fuel used by Bord Gais to generate electricity. It complained
that using fuel mix percentages to determine environmental friendliness
is inappropriate and misleading. Instead it said that Airtricity
should have used the amount of carbon per megawatt hour generated
as a benchmark. Again this complaint was quite strongly countered
by Airtricity, but to no avail.
The ASAI found that the claim that the Airtricity electricity was
five times more environmentally friendly was not sustainable based
on the facts and figures presented to it. However, interestingly
enough for other advertisers out there, the ASAI did not go so far
as to state that Bord Gais were right in asserting that comparisons
must only be made using carbon emissions when measuring environmental
friendliness.
The Result?
Airtricity gave an undertaking to amend its advertising copy and
has done so. Airtricity now describes itself as offering "greener
electricity", on the basis that it is the "greenest" electricity
supplier in the consumer retail market in Ireland. It also refers
to itself as the "number one for renewable energy". The advertisement
copy cites the reference to the fuel mix analysis which is carried
out by the Commission for Energy Regulation in Ireland as the basis
for its copy, and to the fact that it is subject to change. The
references to the bunny rabbits, trees and money savings went unchallenged.
A Cautionary Tale?
Although the ASAI is a self-regulatory body, its rulings are followed
by the advertising industry in Ireland as general rule. The publicity
that an upheld ASAI complaint gains in the press, and the deference
shown to the rulings by the media that carry advertisements, means
that the ASAI rulings generally hold sway.
In addition to the ASAI Code applied in the Airtricity case, mandatory
legislation prohibits misleading advertising and could be used to
similar affect. The Consumer Protection Act 2007 prohibits misleading
advertisements and the making of false claims about goods or services
to consumers. The European Communities (Misleading and Comparative
Marketing Communications) Regulations 2007 prohibit traders from
issuing marketing communications (a very broadly defined term covering
all advertising) that are misleading. A marketing communication
is misleading if it deceives or is likely to deceive a person in
any way, including in relation to the nature of the product or the
characteristics of the product. These Regulations also prohibit
a range of comparative marketing communications, where traders provide
information regarding their competitors' offerings when advertising.
The Regulations give powers to a competitor to apply to the courts
to require any offending marketing communication to be withdrawn
or amended.
The differing views on how to approach product life cycle analysis,
the merits of various fuel types and the affects of goods and services
on the environment make "green" advertising a challenge for any
advertiser. If done well it can be very successful in assisting
a company to increase their market share. However, as with any type
advertising, those highlighting their "green" credentials need to
be very aware of the legal rules and restrictions that apply to
these assertions.
For further information please contact Deirdre
Kilroy.
September 2009.
© 2003-2010 LK Shields Solicitors.
All rights reserved.
|