Better Business Bureau Recommends Verizon Pull Ad Claims, Favoring Comcast
Verizon should end two advertising claims of top ratings for its TV and FiOS services in a pair of customer satisfaction categories, the Better Business Bureau's National Advertising Division (NAD) said Wednesday. NAD said its review was based on complaints…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
from Comcast, and that Verizon has said it will appeal the NAD findings to the National Advertising Review Board (NARB). NAD said the two ad claims are: "In customer satisfaction studies, Verizon is Rated #1 in internet speed and reliability," and "Rated #1 in HD Picture Quality based on customer satisfaction studies." Customer satisfaction surveys demonstrate customer satisfaction with a particular service provider, but shouldn't convey that performance or service was measured and compared, NAD said. The group also said that any future Verizon ad claims based on customer-satisfaction surveys should make it clear that they are claims about customer satisfaction, and not rankings or ratings. In a statement Wednesday, Verizon said that despite the fact the challenge "involved issues that NAD had already addressed twice in the past year in previous cases with Verizon," it took part "in good faith and out of respect for the self-regulatory process." The telco also said it believed NAD "would follow the precedent and guidance it set forth in those previous cases and, in doing so, would make clear to Comcast and other potential challengers that baseless, repeat challenges against already-substantiated customer satisfaction claims will be rejected by the NAD, just as they would be rejected under the rules and precedent of Courts and other adjudicative bodies." However, Verizon said, "NAD failed to follow the unambiguous precedent it established in the previous cases (and on which Verizon relied when creating the current ads), failed to acknowledge the clear language of the ads themselves, and improperly relied on an obviously-deficient consumer perception survey in an attempt to justify its departure from precedent. NAD’s improper analysis and approach leads to an incorrect decision that allows competitors to use the self-regulatory process to repeatedly challenge an advertiser’s claims, regardless of NAD’s prior determinations. For these reasons, among others, Verizon will appeal all aspects of the NAD’s decision to the NARB."