Scottish Power advert featuring architect George Clarke banned by watchdog
A TV advertisement for Scottish Power featuring the architect George Clarke has been banned for misleading viewers into thinking they were watching his Channel 4 show Amazing Spaces.
The promotion ran on the same channel as the show, during its ad breaks, and opened with the text 'George Clarke's amazing green spaces' in the same font and style as the real programme.
Clarke then appeared, saying: 'I've seen some amazing spaces all around the UK. From yellow houses, blue houses, pink houses, and … greener houses. Of course, it is not about the colour, it's all about the green solutions provided by Scottish Power.'
The advert featured the text #ad in the corner for 12 seconds while the end of the commercial used the Scottish Power logo alongside the company's name.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the UK's advertising watchdog, received three complaints that the ad was not obviously distinguishable from George Clarke's Amazing Spaces. The architect also presents George Clarke's Old House New Home and George Clarke's Remarkable Renovations on the same channel.
Scottish Power said Clarke made three verbal references to Scottish Power and that 43 seconds of the 60-second advert contained a 'visual identifier' making it obvious it was an advert.
The UK advertising code states that an ad must be 'obviously distinguishable' from editorial content, especially if it uses a 'situation, performance or style reminiscent of editorial content', to prevent confusing audiences.
The ASA said the #ad symbol was small, 'likely to be overlooked' and was 'insufficient to mitigate' the other elements of the clip that were designed to mimic the style of the TV show.
The watchdog also said that Scottish Power products were not mentioned until halfway through the ad, while the UK ad code states that audiences should be able to quickly recognise the message as a commercial.
'We considered the audience were likely to interpret the ad as programme content,' the ASA said in its ruling banning the ad. 'We considered viewers were unlikely to quickly recognise the message as an ad distinguishable from editorial content and were instead likely to believe [they] were watching a programme.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
a day ago
- Daily Record
Cyriel Dessers Rangers transfer exit splits the Jury as Celtic urged caution over Evan Ferguson
Cyriel Dessers has agreed a deal with AEK - but should Ibrox chiefs really consider selling a striker who has fired 50 goals in his two years in Glasgow? ANDREW NEWPORT: If the fee is big enough then of course. Rangers have let far too much money slip through their fingers by failing to sell when the price is right. Dessers scores plenty - but misses more. He's 30 and his value will only decline from here. SCOTT MCDERMOTT: Only if the price is right. I'd keep Dessers to be second choice striker at Ibrox because of his excellent goal return. But he's 30 years old and is a high earner so if Rangers can make a profit on him with a sale of around £4million they have to consider it. MICHAEL GANNON: If Rangers can make a profit then it's worth taking the dosh. Dessers is on top dollar and he has delivered goals. He's still unreliable in big games, on big money and the wrong side of 30. Take the dosh and invest it. Is Ireland ace and rumoured Celtic target Evan Ferguson a better bet than countryman Adam Idah to lead the line for Brendan Rodgers' team? ANDY: He looked a proper prospect when he burst onto the scene with a hat-trick against Newcastle a couple of years back but he's only scored three goals since November 2023. Idah isn't the finish product either but at least he's been a regular contributor for Celtic. SCOTT: With both players playing at their best, I think Ferguson is a better striker. He has more natural ability, as well as being a powerhouse up front. But he's toiled for two years now in the Premier League and Rodgers sees real potential and development in Idah. MICHAEL: The Ferguson of 12 months ago would have been a good option but it's more uncertain now after a poor season. A loan deal late in the window could be an option but Celtic should be looking at cheaper targets before then. Ian Maxwell has shelved contract talks with Steve Clarke while the Scotland boss focuses on turning around his team's worrying form - but should Clarke stay on even if he leads the nation to the World Cup? ANDY: Maxxy is right to put negotiations on hold as breaking our World Cup duck is all that matters. If Clarke can do that job he'll get the keys to Scotland, never mind a new deal. SCOTT: If he gets us to the World Cup, that will solely be Clarke's decision because of course the SFA would want to keep him on after reaching three major tournaments. But with current form, the question is - will he still be in charge by the end of the campaign if it goes pear-shaped in Copenhagen? MICHAEL: Clarke has earned the right to do what he wants. If he leads the nation to the World Cup, he can do what he likes, even if he might be tempted to walk away on a high. Motherwell have gone foreign again after appointing Jens Berthel Askou as Michael Wimmer's replacement - but should they have looked closer to home? ANDY: You might have thought they'd have had second thoughts about going down that route given the way Wimmer left them in the lurch. But the German did a decent job in his short time and Fir Park and Well bosses will hope Askou can pick up where his predecessor left off. If he doesn't, a Robbie Neilson or Tony Docherty should be their next call. SCOTT: We don't know enough about Berthel Askou yet to make a judgement. But for what Motherwell wants to achieve in the Scottish Premiership, it's hard to not to feel that a manager like Robbie Neilson or Tony Docherty couldn't have done an excellent job there.
South Wales Argus
a day ago
- South Wales Argus
Newport council placemaking plan welcomed by local groups
The city council's new placemaking plan sets out a series of 'quick wins' and more long-term ambitions for welcoming visitors and making the city centre more attractive for Newport's residents. 'The placemaking plan has been very much driven by what those who live and work in the city would like to see happen,' said Cllr James Clarke, the cabinet member for regeneration and business growth. 'This is a plan for the next 15 years – as some will need long-term planning and significant investment – but there are some short-term changes that will be community led, supported by the council, that people will see happening quite quickly.' Those short-term proposals include a food-focused outdoor market around the Steel Wave sculpture, and building a new playground, possibly in John Frost Square, to make central Newport a more 'family-friendly destination'. Efforts to make the city centre more attractive include better lighting, 'wrapping' empty shops with colourful designs, and making local art more visible in public spaces. 'I hope that in just a few months we will be able to demonstrate some tangible improvements in the city centre,' said Cllr Clarke. Other political groups have largely welcomed the Labour-led council's plans to bring improvements to central Newport – but while there is universal agreement that work needs to be done, the new plan's projects have been met with a degree of caution in some cases. Cllr Matthew Evans, who leads the Conservative group, said the plan contains 'some excellent initiatives' but insisted public concerns around safety and crime must be addressed 'as a matter of urgency'. 'We all want to see a better city and I will be there as a critical friend to ensure some of these quick wins are implemented,' he said. Cllr Evans did criticise a perceived 'lack of ambition in the longer term', however, and wanted to see the plan give 'far greater prominence' to the future of the city's Medieval Ship. He also said the council should take a 'more radical approach' to proposals to regenerate the southern end of Commercial Street, and create 'a giant open space which could host concerts and events all year round'. Cllr Mark Howells leads the Lliswerry independent group, and said he and his colleagues welcomed in principle a plan 'which has been missing for some time'. 'However, we remain cautious that it does not go far enough in setting out a bold or ambitious vision for the city's future,' he said. 'Newport faces significant challenges and opportunities, and we need a plan that matches the scale of that reality.' Cllr Howells said the local authority should provide more detail to residents and should have a 'more transparent' timescale for change. However, Cllr Kevin Whitehead, who leads the independent councillors from Bettws, said it would be 'harsh' to criticise the council's aspirations. 'Newport is all of our city, and we should all fully support any efforts to elevate its positive points while having the honest conversations around what it needs to address in order to realise this vision,' he said. Cllr Whitehead said changing negative perceptions of the city centre will be 'the biggest challenge', but added: 'I fully support the aspirations of the plan and would love to celebrate any goals it achieves. Some might say it's overly ambitious looking at it as a whole but I suppose time will tell.' Liberal Democrat councillor Carmel Townsend, said the 'run down' city centre is 'one of the biggest concerns raised' by residents. 'The placemaking plan doesn't go far enough,' she said. 'It should recognise that keeping the place well-maintained is essential and that significant investment is needed. The plan is 'gimmicky' and I can't see how lights, signs and stickers on empty shop windows are going to make much of a difference.' Cllr Clarke said the council 'recognises the challenges' facing the city centre 'but instead of just shrugging our shoulders or complaining, we are determined to make a difference'. 'To fully realise the vision, there will have to be support from a wide range of sources including Newport residents. Positivity will help transform the city centre and ensure it can achieve its full and exciting potential.'
New Statesman
a day ago
- New Statesman
A power for good?
For some, the advent of the worldwide web is still fresh in the memory. But technological leaps seem to happen with ever-increasing frequency, and we now all find ourselves blinking in the brilliant light at the dawn of the age of AI. At the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), we've donned the sunglasses and rolled up our sleeves, and AI is already proving a game-changer in how we regulate. The lightning speed with which AI has developed and integrated into our everyday lives inevitably raises legitimate concerns. What does it mean for jobs, data protection, originality, creativity, copyright, plagiarism, truth, bias, mis- and disinformation and what we think is fake vs real? These are undoubtedly important issues to grapple with. But the technology also brings multiple benefits. As was the case in the mid-1990s with the launch of search, web browsers and online shops, there were innovators, early adopters, cautious sceptics and technology resisters. AI is no different. The ASA is firmly in the 'early adopter' category. Four years ago, we appointed a head of data science and began building our AI capability; AI is now central to our transformation into a preventative and proactive regulator. Around 94 per cent of the 33,903 ads we had amended or withdrawn last year came from our proactive work using our AI-based Active Ad Monitoring system. The ability to be front-foot and take quick and effective action is crucial when regulating the vast online ecosystem. AI gives us much greater visibility of online ads. Last year, our system scanned 28 million ads with machine learning and, increasingly, large language models finding the likely non-compliant ads we're interested in. That was a tenfold increase on 2023. Our target is to scan 50 million ads this year. AI-based tools are embedded in our work to help us monitor and tackle ads in high-priority areas and are now used in most of our projects, including our work on climate change and the environment, influencer marketing, financial advertising, prescription-only medicines, gambling and e-cigarettes. It's enabling us to carry out world-leading regulation – monitoring, identifying and tackling potential problem ads at pace and scale. Take one example: our ongoing climate change and environment project. Following high-profile and precedent-setting rulings against major players in various industries, we're now seeing businesses adapting and evolving to make better evidenced, more precise green claims. Monthly sweeps using AI show high levels of compliance. Following our 2023 airline rulings on misleading 'sustainable' and 'eco-friendly' claims, of the circa 140,000 ads we monitored, we found just five that were clearly non-compliant. Importantly, we're not removing humans from the equation. Our experts are and will remain central to our regulation. While our AI capability has dramatically improved the efficiency of our monitoring (weeding out the millions of ads that stick to the rules and aren't a problem), it filters and flags potential problem ads to our human specialists for their expert assessment. AI is assisting rather replacing our people. There are a lot of open questions about how AI will impact industries, positively and negatively. And that's certainly true of advertising, as ever at the forefront of technological change. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe We know that the use of AI is already changing advertising. There are big efficiency and effectiveness gains in play. Lower-cost ad ideation and creation, hyper-personalisation and improved customer experience. Quicker and better media planning and buying. Get this right and ads will be cheaper to make and send, and be more engaging and relevant to receive. UK businesses and the British economy will be boosted. But in all of this, responsible ads must not be sacrificed at the altar of advances in technology. We're well aware of the many potential benefits and problems AI poses for advertising. Think back to the story from Glasgow, where AI-generated ads promised a Willy Wonka-themed event that wasn't quite as advertised. The advertising of certain AI products and services certainly throws up broader ethical considerations. On our radar are ads for AI tech offering mental health support (substituting human therapists), essay-writing tools that pass work off as original, and chat boxes that act as a partner or friend. We don't regulate the products themselves, but in all these examples there is potential for ads to be misleading, irresponsible or harmful. How can businesses use AI safely and responsibly? What does that mean for advertisers? Our media and technology-neutral rules already cover most of the risks. Ads can't mislead, a principle as old as the hills. In the past, that might have been using photo-editing software; today, it might be through generative AI. Adverts must not be likely to cause harm or serious or widespread offence either. Generative AI might be an unsurpassed pattern-recogniser, but it's not a human and may well miss the nuance of judging prevailing standards in society when producing ad content. Advertisers who harness AI can't abdicate responsibility for the creative content that it produces. That's why we urge businesses to be careful: use the good of AI, but avoid the bad. Put in place human checks and balances. At the ASA, we're determined to take full advantage of technological advances, developing our Active Ad Monitoring system further and making even more use of large language models to speed up review of ads. Actively experimenting with how these tools can make our internal processes more efficient. And continuing to keep a close eye on how AI is used in advertising. We are witnessing the next technological revolution that will change society in ways the internet did, perhaps even more. We can say with confidence that our use of AI is already delivering world-leading advertising regulation. Related
