Post by Cassus on Jun 16, 2010 17:45:28 GMT
Today the ASA Council, in their formal adjudications process, have upheld my complaint about the psychic 'Prabjot'.
The adjudication can be read below (scroll down to find the entry for "Innershanti t/a Prajbot"):
www.asa.org.uk/Complaints-and-ASA-action/Adjudications.aspx
Here are a few details about why this adjudication is important.
The April 2010 issue of "Soul and Spirit" magazine contained a number of advertisements for psychics, including one for "Prabjot". The ad can be seen here:
![]()
i127.Report this post to Admin please.com/albums/p134/JonDonnis/1-1572.jpg[/img]
At the moment, psychics may legally advertise their services.
The issue revolved around adverts which claim their psychics are "accurate" - this is a claim that is capable of objective substantiation, and under the ASA's rules, advertisers must hold documentary evidence of such claims.
Complaints made to the ASA do not, in general, proceed to a formal adjudication - especially when an adjudication has been made on a similar matter in the past.
In many cases, the ASA prefers to reach an agreement with the advertiser - in essence, the ASA says "Don't do it again!" and the advertiser says, "Yes, Miss!"
In this way, the ASA achieves the same result as a formal adjudication - the advertising stops - without the burdensome expense of a full investigation.
Complaints that reach this conclusion are said to be "informally resolved", and each week the ASA publishes a list of them.
At that time, I submitted several dozen complaints about psychics. The ASA eventually decided to disregard most of them, and to focus on a few specimen cases. They wanted a formal adjudication against which future complaints could be judged.
One of the specimen cases was "Prajbot". The ASA summarised my complaint thus:
The ASA Council's conclusion was:
As a result of this adjudication, psychics can no longer advertise themselves as "accurate" without incurring the wrath of the authorities.
If they do, any complaints made about them are likely to be automatically passed to the ASA's compliance team, since such claims are now regarded as misleading and likely to exploit vulnerable people.
It is now open season against "accurate" psychics and their adverts.
Of course, these "psychics" have a simple defence - they can produce scientific evidence of their abilities. Don't hold your breath!
The adjudication can be read below (scroll down to find the entry for "Innershanti t/a Prajbot"):
www.asa.org.uk/Complaints-and-ASA-action/Adjudications.aspx
Here are a few details about why this adjudication is important.
The April 2010 issue of "Soul and Spirit" magazine contained a number of advertisements for psychics, including one for "Prabjot". The ad can be seen here:
At the moment, psychics may legally advertise their services.
The issue revolved around adverts which claim their psychics are "accurate" - this is a claim that is capable of objective substantiation, and under the ASA's rules, advertisers must hold documentary evidence of such claims.
Complaints made to the ASA do not, in general, proceed to a formal adjudication - especially when an adjudication has been made on a similar matter in the past.
In many cases, the ASA prefers to reach an agreement with the advertiser - in essence, the ASA says "Don't do it again!" and the advertiser says, "Yes, Miss!"
In this way, the ASA achieves the same result as a formal adjudication - the advertising stops - without the burdensome expense of a full investigation.
Complaints that reach this conclusion are said to be "informally resolved", and each week the ASA publishes a list of them.
At that time, I submitted several dozen complaints about psychics. The ASA eventually decided to disregard most of them, and to focus on a few specimen cases. They wanted a formal adjudication against which future complaints could be judged.
One of the specimen cases was "Prajbot". The ASA summarised my complaint thus:
1. The complainant challenged whether the claim "Accurate, honest and sincere readings" was misleading, and
2. The ASA challenged whether the claim "Accurate, honest and sincere readings" was likely to exploit vulnerable people.
2. The ASA challenged whether the claim "Accurate, honest and sincere readings" was likely to exploit vulnerable people.
The ASA Council's conclusion was:
The ASA was concerned by Innershanti's lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code clause 2.6 (Non-response). We reminded Innershanti of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries.
We considered that the claim to provide "Accurate, honest and sincere readings" was likely to be interpreted by readers as a guarantee of the veracity of psychic readings, which we considered to be a claim that required objective substantiation. Because we had not seen any evidence to substantiate the claim that Innershanti could provide "accurate" psychic readings, we concluded the claim was therefore likely to mislead and exploit vulnerable people.
The ad breached CAP Code clauses 2.6 (Non-response), 3.1 (Substantiation), 6.1 (Honesty) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).
Action: The ad must not appear again in its current form. We asked CAP to inform its members of the problem with Innershanti.
We considered that the claim to provide "Accurate, honest and sincere readings" was likely to be interpreted by readers as a guarantee of the veracity of psychic readings, which we considered to be a claim that required objective substantiation. Because we had not seen any evidence to substantiate the claim that Innershanti could provide "accurate" psychic readings, we concluded the claim was therefore likely to mislead and exploit vulnerable people.
The ad breached CAP Code clauses 2.6 (Non-response), 3.1 (Substantiation), 6.1 (Honesty) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).
Action: The ad must not appear again in its current form. We asked CAP to inform its members of the problem with Innershanti.
As a result of this adjudication, psychics can no longer advertise themselves as "accurate" without incurring the wrath of the authorities.
If they do, any complaints made about them are likely to be automatically passed to the ASA's compliance team, since such claims are now regarded as misleading and likely to exploit vulnerable people.
It is now open season against "accurate" psychics and their adverts.
Of course, these "psychics" have a simple defence - they can produce scientific evidence of their abilities. Don't hold your breath!
