Complaint: 17/063

Energizer Television

Details

Complainants
D. McDonald
advertisers
Energizer NZ Limited
Year
2017
Media
Television
Product
Household Goods
Clauses
Decision
No Grounds to Proceed
ASA Links
Website Listing
Decision Document

Document

2017_6300.png

COMPLAINT NUMBER 17/063

COMPLAINANT D McDonald ADVERTISER Energizer NZ Limited ADVERTISEMENT Energizer Television DATE OF MEETING 27 February 2017

OUTCOME No Grounds to Proceed


Advertisement: The television advertisement for the Energizer Eco Advance Battery includes the following voiceover "It's our biggest advance yet, Energizer Eco Advance, number one longest lasting alkaline battery. Made with 4% recycled batteries - That's positive energy".

The Chair ruled there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed. Complainant, D McDonald, said: Advtsg complaint energiser batt pos nrgy. 16/2

Dear asa. Tv1 news

6:30pm. Thurs. Advtsg stds authy.

Unhappy

Corrupt school education.

People must chuck out shocking ads. Advert says thats positive energy. False claim.

Electrical energy is moved by negative electrons. Also law of conservation of energy.

There isn't +ve -ve energy.

Law mass energy equivalence. Bogus ad.

Complaint.

Ridiculous statements. Bad information. Trickery deceptive. Joking about science facts.

Fooling the public. Demean media.

The relevant provisions were Code of Ethics - Basic Principle 4, Rule 2.

The Chair noted the Complainant's concerns about the reference to "positive energy",

which they believe is a false claim as "Electrical energy is moved by negative electrons".

The Chair said the advertisement is promoting the "positive" improvements in this "energy" source, or battery, which make it good for the environment. The Chair said the Energizer Eco Advance is made with 4% recycled batteries and is long lasting.

The Chair ruled the advertisement had been prepared with a due sense of social responsibility to consumers and there was no apparent breach of Basic Principle 4 or Rule 2

17/063


of the Code of Ethics. Accordingly, the Chair ruled there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed.

Chai r' s Ruling: Complaint No Grounds to Proceed

































































2