(Photo: betterbethany)

We just finished our food and wanted to get a drink. We noticed the sign at Haagen-Daz advertising a Large 22 oz. Soda or Juice special for a $1 tax included. We decided to go here instead of going to the other vendor we originally ordered our food. When I reached the front, I asked for a large root beer with no ice (since my teeth are sensitive to very cold drinks and I love lots of soda). When I gave the owner a dollar for payment, he said it cost more with no ice. A little taken aback, I said "Excuse me?" He retorted, "It's on the sign."

Of course, I didn't see it on the sign but because I didn't want to hold up the line, I agreed to the ice (the ice was packed all the way so there was little soda left). I told my boyfriend about it when I sat down and started to examine the sign. My boyfriend was the one who noticed the little scribble at the bottom of the sign. I had to go up close but sure enough, there it was.

Can someone tell me..is this legal?

We weren't sure if this type of thing was allowed or not, so we took a look at the NYC Department of Consumer Affairs guide to spotting false advertising. The guide helps teach consumers to spot deceptive advertising to they can report it to the city (PDF). Here's what they had to say about "fine print."

Watch out for FOOTNOTES AND ASTERISKS (“*”). The “fine print” in an advertisement sometimes changes an offer made in the large print. That’s deceptive.

With that in mind, this sign does seem to stretch the boundaries of what's allowed. If you'd like to report it to the city so the experts can evaluate it, send your pictures of the ad and a cover letter to this address:

Department of Consumer Affairs
Consumer Complaints
42 Broadway, 9th floor
New York NY 10004

FALSE ADVERTISING How to Spot It and What You Can Do About It (PDF) [NYC Department Of Consumer Affairs]

Jim writes:

Greetings, Consumerist braintrust. Attached is a picture I think you'll find interesting. I took it yesterday at my local Staples store. As you can see, it states that as of July 1, 2008, it is the law that you must use a hands-free calling device while operating a vehicle. And that's certainly true. At least, it's true in California. But I live in Birmingham, Alabama, which is a couple thousand miles away from California, and which has no such laws. There was no disclaimer on the display, just a "DO IT NOW!" admonition to comply with a law that doesn't apply to you.

Five states restrict their residents from yabbering while driving: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Washington, and as of July 1, California.

Call us old fashioned, but we think public safety laws should be written by legislators, not marketers.

Cell Phone Driving Laws [Governors Highway Safety Association]

In general, says the study, Boomers are usually the "breadwinners in the household," and "make most or all of the family spending decisions."

The study tosses out the following labels, and we toss in our own thoughts about how this could influence advertising:

Promiscuous Purchasers

40-59 spend more than three times the amount of money per month on spouses ($514) than adults under 40 ($169). Additionally, they spend nearly twice as much per month on kids ($295 vs. $158) and three times the amount per month on teen children ($494 vs. $136). With so many purchase decisions to make for the household, these "Promiscuous Purchasers" are an important marketing sector even when they are not the prime target.

[Translation: Boomers are gatekeepers, so ads targeting youth need to also secretly target their parents, or train the primary target audience to advocate for the product in Boomer-friendly language.]

Free Agent Shoppers

40 and 50-somethings are more open to new brands and less brand loyal than people under 40. Twenty-six percent of Boomers said they are not at all brand loyal versus 21% of Gen X and Millennials. In fact, Gen Y are the most likely to say that once they have made a commitment to a brand, they will stick with it, no matter what. The willingness of 40 and 50 year-olds to buy new brands carries over across virtually every product category including electronics, personal care products, restaurants, automobiles and more. And when compared to the Generation who came before them these "Free Agent Shoppers" have very different spending habits. No longer will this age group buy the same products based on lifelong brand decisions and spend less as they age. This demo is redefining brand loyalty and determining purchase decisions based on the effectiveness of products. Today's 40 and 50-somethings stick with a product for as long as it's good and fulfills their complex needs. They are not afraid to change for something they feel will improve their lives.

[Translation: Boomers like to shop around, and they like to self-improve. Combine the two activities and you've got a compelling brand.]

Savvy Switchers

While Boomers are very open to new brands, they will not switch just because something is new. Ninety-one percent of people in their 40s and 50s want the brand to provide more value versus 83% of Gen X and Millennials. Boomers will consider new brands if that brand is a better alternative—the product or service must be more useful, functional and provide the most benefit/value. Unlike Millennials and Gen Xers they are less likely to be influenced by the notion that the brand is more prestigious or the latest style; instead, their purchase decisions are based on reliability and quality. The product/service needs to have the best features, not necessarily the most features.

[Translation: Ads that focus on movements, fashions, or trends don't work as well on Boomers—probably because they're not as relevant.]

The study also found that newborns, or "Generation Teat," will buy anything that's offered to them online, provided you place the cursor over the "buy it now" button and place the keyboard next to their feet. Now there's a demographic to go after.

"Breadwinning Boomers Responsible for Multi-Generational Brand Decisions, TV Land's 'Generation BUY' Study Finds"
(Photo: Getty)

Universal TechTronics calls the converter box the "Miracle ClearView TV," and promises "No Bills: New ClearView TV receives free channels, no need to pay for cable to get the new digital picture quality and sound." These guys really like the word "miracle."

"They’re really targeting the senior citizens who are going to be confused and not up-to-date on the technology,'' said Alison Preszler, a spokeswoman for the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

The ad is designed to look like a news article and features that smiling older gentleman displaying his actual warranty certificates. The Better Business Bureau has seen the ad appear in newspapers in Portland, Ore.; Memphis, Tenn.; Atlantic City, N.J.; Charlotte, N.C.; and the state of Ohio.

"Think twice before buying a digital TV converter box from this man" [Los Angeles Times] (Thanks to Paul!)
RELATED
"BBB warns of DTV converter-box scam" [Consumer Reports]
"A Sucker Is Converted Every Minute"
(Image: Los Angeles Times)

UPDATE: Charter has responded to this post and says they're working with the family to get them a better prize.

The winner was the straight talking submission penned by Mike Lewis' daughter, who said her dad was the greatest because he got up every morning, worked hard, and worked in the yard. When it came time to deliver the goods, there were miscommunications back and forth as Charter Cable marketing employee Jeff Hatcher tried to process Lewis' W-9 (part of the contest rules were that the winner had to pay sales tax on the prize). Then Hatcher realized the promised TV was too expensive for his marketing budget and sent a 19-inch one instead.

"It’s an insult," Chris Lewis, the mother, told Enews. “We already have a 40-inch TV, so we really don’t need a 19-inch...they shouldn't be allowed to promise whatever they like and not follow through."

Congratulations, Jeff Hatcher of Charter’s marketing offices in Alabama and Georgia, who ran the promotion, you are officially a jerk. Delivering the real TV was too expensive, but man, that free publicity, it sure was free. We don't know whether you have kids, but we have a feeling you won't be up for World's Greatest Dad anytime soon. Maybe Your CEO, neil.smit@chartercom.com, would be interested in hearing about what a great job you're doing marketing the company.

Cable system fails to deliver promised prize to local winner [The News Courier] (Thanks to Brian!)
(Photo: Getty)

In response to this post, Marty Richmond, Charter Communications Director of Investor Relations and Communications, wrote:

This letter is in response to your July 8 post regarding Charter Communications and its “Charter Presents Father’s Day in HD” contest.

In May, Charter announced an essay contest for kids of all ages to write a brief essay about why their Dad deserved to win a giant HDTV and free Charter services for a year. More than 10,000 essays were submitted and a grand prize winner in Bristol, Tennessee, along with four finalists, was selected.

In addition, due to such an overwhelming response to the contest, we expanded the number of winners to include “honorable mention” finalists. At the discretion of our local offices, these winners could be awarded prizes ranging from free services to an HDTV.

In Charter’s East Division, which includes the state of Alabama, 10 19-inch HDTVs were awarded as honorable mention prizes. In the case of the Lewis family of Limestone County, Alabama, an honorable mention prize was intended to be awarded. The details presented to the family were about a 19-inch HDTV honorable mention prize, not the grand prize 65-inch HDTV. Regrettably, this was not clearly communicated.

Charter has worked with the Lewis family, and we have awarded them prizes that are more aligned with their understanding of the contest.

We ask that you post a clarification and welcome you to contact me directly for any further details.

As information, attached is the original press release announcing the contest, a press release announcing the grand prize winner, and a press release summarizing the results.

Regards,

Marty Richmond

Got it. Glad the Lewis family expectations, set by your employee, Jeff Hatcher, will be accommodated.

Here are the three press releases:

Charter Presents Father’s Day in HD

Tell Charter why your Dad deserves to win a giant HDTV and a free year of
The Charter Bundle™

St. Louis, Missouri, May 27, 2008 – Charter Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: CHTR) today launched a contest in which kids of all ages can submit a brief essay telling the Company why their Dad deserves to win a giant high definition television (HDTV), along with Charter High Definition® (HD) service and The Charter Bundle™ free for a year.
“What better way to spend Father’s Day than by watching your favorite shows, movies, and sports on a giant HDTV with your Dad,” said Barbara Hedges, Senior Vice President of Consumer Marketing for Charter. “And with a free year of The Charter Bundle, he’ll receive Digital Cable® for access to On Demand, Charter High-Speed® Internet for a fast and reliable Internet experience, and Charter Telephone® for unlimited local and long distance calling.”
With Charter High Definition service, Charter customers can choose from over 150 shows and the latest Hollywood hits On Demand. HD customers also experience crystal-clear picture quality up to 6X the resolution of regular TV.
One lucky Dad will win the grand prize of a giant HDTV, plus a year of The Charter Bundle with HD service for free, and four finalists will win a free year of The Charter Bundle with HD service. For additional contest information, visit www.charter.com/HDdad.
Over the past year, Charter has invested over a billion dollars in capital to serve its customers and to enhance its service capabilities. Charter is committed to investing in its communities, providing an advanced network on which residential and commercial customers rely for their communications needs, and delivering value to all its customers by offering high-quality products and services backed up by superior customer care.

Tennessee Dad Wins “Charter Presents Father’s Day in HD” Contest

Daughter nominated Dad to win a giant HDTV and a free year of
The Charter Bundle™ with Charter High Definition® service

St. Louis, Missouri, June 12, 2008 – Charter Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: CHTR) today announced the winners of a contest in which kids of all ages submitted brief essays telling the Company why their Dad deserved to win a giant high definition television (HDTV), along with Charter High Definition® (HD) service and The Charter Bundle™ free for a year.
Abe Manogue, the contest winner and leukemia survivor, was nominated by his daughter who said in her essay: “My Dad worked really hard to get through three years of sickening chemotherapy. Before he was really able to, my Dad acquired a job to better support his family, and voluntarily got off disability. When he comes home at night, tired from his long day, he really enjoys watching TV.”
“We received over 10,000 entries for this contest, which reinforces our customers’ desire for quality high definition,” said Barbara Hedges, Senior Vice President of Consumer Marketing for Charter. “HD customers experience picture quality up to 6X the resolution of regular TV. With Charter High Definition service, our customers can choose from the most popular networks and nearly 200 shows and the latest Hollywood hits On Demand.
“And with a new HDTV and a free year of The Charter Bundle, our winning Dad will receive Digital Cable® for access to On Demand, Charter High-Speed® Internet for a fast and reliable Internet experience, and Charter Telephone® for unlimited local and long distance calling,” Ms. Hedges concluded.
Four lucky finalists from St. Louis, Missouri; Boiling Springs, South Carolina; Kalamazoo, Michigan; and Fort Worth, Texas each won a free year of The Charter Bundle with HD service. Furthermore, due to such a positive response to the contest, Charter expanded its winners to include “honorable mention” finalists as well. More than a dozen Dads in markets across the country were each recognized with additional prizes ranging from a free HDTV to Charter High Definition service.
For contest information, visit www.charter.com/HDdad.

Over the past year, Charter has invested over a billion dollars in capital to serve its customers and to enhance its service capabilities. Charter is committed to investing in its communities, providing an advanced network on which residential and commercial customers rely for their communications needs, and delivering value to all its customers by offering high-quality products and services backed up by superior customer care.

Charter Awards More Than 20 Dads
Prizes in its “Charter Presents Father’s Day in HD” Contest

Due to positive response to the contest, Charter expands the number of winners
and awards over a dozen additional prizes

St. Louis, Missouri, July 9, 2008 – Charter Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: CHTR) today announced the results of a contest in which kids of all ages submitted brief essays telling the Company why their Dad deserved to win a giant high definition television (HDTV), along with Charter High Definition® (HD) service and The Charter Bundle™ free for a year.
“We received over 10,000 entries for this contest, which demonstrates children’s vast appreciation for their fathers and reinforces our customers’ desire for quality high definition service,” said Barbara Hedges, Senior Vice President of Consumer Marketing for Charter. “Due to such a positive response, Charter expanded the contest to include ‘honorable mention’ winners in addition to the grand prize winner and four finalists. We could not have been more pleased by the response to the contest, and we are excited to recognize and reward these deserving Dads.”
Grand Prize Winner
Abe Manogue, the grand prize winner and leukemia survivor, was nominated by his daughter. Mr. Manogue was awarded a 65” HDTV along with Charter High Definition® service and The Charter Bundle™ free for a year. The Manogue family is thrilled to have won this contest, and is looking for the “perfect place” to put their new 65” HDTV.
Four Finalists
Four lucky finalists from St. Louis, Missouri; Boiling Springs, South Carolina; Kalamazoo, Michigan; and Fort Worth, Texas each won a free year of The Charter Bundle with HD service.

Honorable Mentions
Due to an overwhelming response, Charter expanded the contest to include honorable mention winners. More than a dozen Dads in markets across the country were each recognized with additional prizes ranging from flat screen HDTVs to free Charter services for a year.
For full contest information, including winning submissions, visit www.charter.com/HDdad.
Over the past year, Charter has invested over a billion dollars in capital to serve its customers and to enhance its service capabilities. Charter is committed to investing in its communities, providing an advanced network on which residential and commercial customers rely for their communications needs, and delivering value to all its customers by offering high-quality products and services backed up by superior customer care.

Looks like everything is hunky-dory now. All it took was a little negative publicity.

Kevin says:

I just had to take a picture and send it to you. Maybe we should start shopping at Winn Dixie?

Oh, I don't know, Kevin. Perhaps you should reward Publix for their unflinching honesty? Or something?

Five-piece set includes headboard, footboard, wood rails/slats, dresser and mirror.

That's right, the bed is actually three pieces. That nightstand and other dresser must have wandered onto the set accidentally.

Scott, who tipped us to this, writes, "So to Value City, a bed = 3 pieces? Sheesh! Why not consider each side rail a piece and call it a 6 piece set!?!" Great idea! We think we've discovered a whole new way to increase profits without raising prices: segmentation. Why, that dresser can be listed as a 7 piece storage system by itself, a pizza with twelve pepperoni slices on it is suddenly a 12-topping pizza, and KFC's 2-piece chicken meal immediately doubles to a 4-piecer if you count the bones as individual units.

The important thing to remember is to use misleading photographs, though, or else your customers might not take the bait.

"Classic Cherry Queen 5-PC Bedroom Package" [Value City Furniture] (Thanks to Scott!)

The article says,

Among examples cited by critics are episodes of the family-oriented show "7th Heaven," which included plot lines revolving around Oreo cookies. Other examples include "The Office" in which characters work at a Staples office supply store; a "CSI" show in which characters promote features of a General Motors vehicle; and a "Smallville" episode in which the dialogue included the line "Acuvue to the rescue," a reference to the contact lens maker.

7th Heaven provides a sparkling example of embedded advertising. Below, the characters are so busy choking down Oreos that they can barely spit out their dialogue.

In another scene, we hear the dialogue, "How about some cookies and milk? Oreos? It's my favorite. Hey, mine too!" It seems that Nabisco is so vain that they even have to change the time-honored phrase "milk and cookies" to "cookies and milk."

The AP says,

Writers, who have to incorporate products into scripts, and actors, who shill for products without getting paid for it, are especially unhappy.

The Writers Guild of America West, a union that represents Hollywood television and film screenwriters, wants "real time" disclosure at the time the product is mentioned, like a text "crawl" at the bottom of the screen.

"Since DVRs and other such devices allow viewers to skip or fast forward through opening and closing credits, requiring disclosure at some other moment in the programming will simply not offer adequate protection," wrote Patric Verrone, president of the organization, in a letter to Martin.

Jeffrey Perlman with the American Advertising Federation said running a crawl is an "absolutely terrible idea" and that it would be "terribly disruptive" for television viewers.

We suppose some additional disclosure is a decent idea but we're not exactly sure who the FCC is trying to protect. Does the FCC think that there are people out there (besides children) that believe that these TV characters are real people who are actually enjoying these products? Who exactly would benefit from additional disclosure? Naturally, Consumerists are much too savvy to become unwitting victims of embedded advertising. In fact, we're so savvy that we don't even feel like grabbing a gallon of cold milk and devouring a sleeve of creamy, crunchy, delicious Oreo cookies.

FCC may put stealthy advertising on audience radar [AP] (Thanks to Dan!)

PedEgg Accused Of Gross Injustice [The Smoking Gun]

I've always been a good customer for Compusa, even after their local stores here closed and they went to catalog and online sales only. I've ordered a full computer for my inlaws less than 3 months ago, and several parts from their online or catalog advertising they send me via mail or email.

This week I received a catalog in the mail from Compusa. The front says Vol. I Issue 6BE. I was paging through the catalog like I normally do to see what they have. I noticed a videocard that looked to be a good deal and I was interested in it. I tried to order this card yesterday morning.

The videocard is a Visiontek Radeon HD 3870 X2 Overclocked Edition which is advertised in the catalog on page 54 for $114.99 twice including a picture of the actual card. When I went to their website I saw the card was $399.99 at this link:

I thought, wow, what a good deal. I must have to call into the # on the catalog to get this pricing they are advertising. So I called into the # on the catalog (1-800-COMPUSA) and waited to talk to a sales rep. A guy answered the phone and I told him I received the catalog mailer and would like to order a video card. He asked for the part # and I said V261-3874. He said ok, and asked for the priority code listed on the back of the catalog I received. I told him that info was KFE-2801. He said ok, I see we have that card for $399.99, how many would you like? I said I am interested but the catalog pricing shows $114.99 not only once, but twice in the ad with a picture of the videocard.

I was put on hold for several minutes. He returned talking frantic and said that it was a misprint in the ad and that their cost for the card was much more than the advertised price. I said ok, but I want the advertised price, it wasn't an error in one spot, you show this card part # for $114.99 twice on the same page. He said they would not honor the mistake and that if I wanted one I would have to pay $399.99 for it. I said, what are you doing for those who got the mailer with this pricing. He became rude and told me I was one of about 600 people who tried to call in and get this deal and they are not helping anyone for that type of price. He immediately went on to ask me if there was anything else I would like to order instead. I asked again if they were honoring their advertised pricing and he said no and have a good day.

Typically, stores aren't required obvious misprints such as a car for $200.00, etc. Things get a little foggy when the misprint isn't obviously a typo. Usually what a reputable store will do in a situation like this is to post a notice informing their customers that there's been a misprint. For example, placing a notice on the CompUSA website would have been the appropriate thing to do in this case. What's not ok is to wait for their customers to call about the mistake and then offer to sell them the video card at a higher price. CompUSA should be making an effort to inform their customers that there's been a misprint in their catalog.

"A condom in my beer" [HolyJuan]
(Photos: HolyJuan)

So the brand name is "Genuine Steakhouse," therefore they are Genuine Steakhouse Steaks. This does not mean anything. They are not "genuine" anything, nor are they coming from a "steakhouse," except for, I guess the slaughterhouse, which is a house where steaks come from. The next sentence, "100% freshness guaranteed or your money back" is also pretty lean on meaning. One would hope that spoiled, past-due meat would not be sold in the first place and I think it's safe to say that, should that meat accidentally get sold, it would certainly be accepted for a refund. Then again, I don't know much about Wal-Mart, so maybe they are always selling rotten meat and not giving you money back for it. Who's to say.

What they have cleverly done here is put a bunch of connotation-rich words near each other, in a construction that prevents the words from having any kind of actual meaning that might make it incumbent upon the company to provide anything even slightly out of the ordinary. Genuine Steakhouse...100% guaranteed...money back. A casual gloss could easily give you the false impression that they are somehow guaranteeing that this meat has a certain level of quality, or comes from a specific steakhouse, or something like that. In fact, they are just announcing the fact that they are putting a trademarked brand name on run-of-the-mill USDA-whatever meat, and then guaranteeing that they won't sell it once it putrefies.

Oh, Richie, this is what happens when you think about Wal-Mart too much. It's bad for your health. Speaking of bad for your health, if you click on over to the SteakHouse Steaks page at Walmart.com, you'll see that concerning the "100% guaranteed fresh" bit..."*Restrictions apply. Please see store for details."

Eek.

Meaningless, You Mean It's All Been Meaningless [I Feel Crazy]
Wal-Mart Steaks

The article says,

The clip, which has been viewed more than two million times, shows 25-year-old Lauren Bernat hula hooping in time with the fitness video game.

Rumours that the clip was a clever marketing ploy for the Wii Fit spread after it emerged that both Miss Bernat and her boyfriend, who filmed the footage, work in advertising.

Giovanny Gutierrez, 30, works as director of interactive media for Tinsley Advertising in Miami, Florida. According to his biography on the firm’s website, he "creates web, e-mail and interactive marketing solutions that perfectly integrate with television, radio and print campaigns."

"Gio is a master of e-commerce, having created web portals for scores of businesses," the biography adds.

Miss Bernat works as an account executive at Tinsley Advertising, where her duties include "evaluating the responses to our Internet advertising".

But Nintendo has denied that the footage is part of an advertising campaign. "This has and is absolutely 100 per cent nothing to do with Nintendo," a spokesman said. "Nintendo did not create it and were not aware of it until it was brought it to our attention."

Mr Gutierrez has also denied that it was a viral advert for the Wii Fit.

The game, which allows Nintendo Wii owners to do a range of exercises and stretches under the guidance of on on-screen fitness expert, hardly needs the free publicity, having sold more than 300,000 copies in the UK in its first two weeks on sale, and sold out in many parts of the world.

But the YouTube affair has done much to boost the profile of Mr Gutierrez and his agency.

The evidence that this is an organized marketing campaign seems circumstantial to us. However, advertisers are always coming up with new ways to turn attention toward new products so who knows? We'll just have to keep watching the video until we figure it out.

Wii Fit underwear girl: A marketing hoax? [The Telegraph]

The sign reads, "It's time for you to do your part to stimulate the economy. And there's no better way to kick the economy up a notch than with a really great pair of pumps. Or a new flat screen TV. Or a fabulous bag. Or whatever you've been dying to get your hands on! So don't delay. CELEBRATE THE STIMULUS. TREAT YOURSELF TO SOMETHING SPECIAL TODAY!"

Mark says, "I enjoy how excessive consumerism is framed in patriotic terms."

Advert [Flickr]

Lumber Liquidators [Official Site] (Thanks to Farhood!)

Wal-Mart's free service allows sellers and buyers to haggle over items in 7 different categories, but before you get too excited you may want to check out the list of items which are prohibited from Wal-Marts free ads which include blood, bodily fluids or body parts, animal parts or fluids, nonprescription drugs, prescription drugs and medical devices, including but not limited to defibrillators, hypodermic needles or hearing aids. That about takes all the fun out of it for us.

One thing we like about Craigslist is their relative neutrality. It's not weighed down by paid sponsors in the way that Google and E-bay seems to be. However, with Wal-Mart's new service, advertisers can pay Oodle.com for higher placement on their search results. While this surely bolsters income, it could render the service less usable. Unless Wal-Mart thinks such things through, we could see their new internet ads ending up like their online-movie service. Extinct.

Wal-Mart Adds Free Online Classifieds [Wall Street Journal]
Wal-Mart challenges Craigslist [MSN Money]
(Photo: Dysolution)

On Wednesday, Kieffe & Sons posted a statement on their website, apologizing to "all who were offended." As commenters pointed out, saying you're sorry that someone got offended is not the same as actually apologizing for what you said. Now, according to the Bakersfield Californian, we find out even the non-apology wasn't genuine.

“I don’t regret the sentiment at all,” said Kieffe, who bought the 48-year-old dealership from his father in 1974. “It’s what we believe.”

. . .

The dealer’s Web site Thursday bore a statement about the ad that included an apology “to all who were offended.” Kieffe said he’d been contacted by Ford Motor Co. after the manufacturer heard complaints from numerous “blog-lo-dites.” The company asked him to post something saying he was sorry if he’d offended anyone, Kieffe said.

Kieffe said he will continue using J.W. Horne for the dealer's ads. Horne also confirmed that he wrote the trolling, single-entry blog that went up on Thursday.

Ford Says "Shut Up" Ad Was a Mistake, But Dealer Stands Behind It [Bakersfield Californian]
PREVIOUSLY: California Ford Dealership Radio Ad Tells Non-Christians To "Sit Down And Shut Up"
(Photo: Amy Watts)

According to the Bakersfield Californian, Rick Kieffe, the dealership owner, said he doesn't remember approving the ad (emphasis added):

“It’s just something that went by us,” said Kieffe, who does not attend church but considers himself “a Christian spirit.” “We’re obviously sorry that it offends a given segment who identifies themselves as atheist.

Kieffe said he received a flood of angry phone calls from people around the world who saw blog posts about the story. Kieffe's advertiser, or someone claiming to be him, apparently didn't get the memo, as he has posted an unapologetic screed conflating gay marriage with the purchase of a Japanese car (seriously).

PREVIOUSLY: California Ford Dealership Radio Ad Tells Christians to "Sit Down and Shut Up"
Car Dealer Regrets Ads Telling Non-Christians to "Sit Down and Shut Up" [Bakersfield Californian]
(Photo: Amy Watts)

I got in touch with Sears customer service yesterday (1-800 4 MY HOME). After 20 minutes on the phone explaining to them why the ad was misleading they agreed to provide all of the pieces I had selected at half off.

Congratulations to Nazar. It's amazing what a little escalation and tenacity can accomplish.

PREVIOUSLY: Sears Kicks Off Holiday Weekend With False Advertising

This advertisement was in the Sunday paper in Northern New Jersey. I was in sore need of some garage storage and so was happy to see that Sears was offering all garage storage at 50% off. After heading to the Sears at Paramus Park Mall and picking the units we wanted (none of which were closeout) we were told that only the cabinet pictured was ringing up at 50% off and that all other units (under the same brand-name) were on sale for 20%. We showed the ad to our salesman, who read it and understood it to mean that all garage storage was half off.

He called the manager to confirm. The manager, Edna, said that the ad clearly indicated that only the pictured cabinet was half off and that we would have to pay more for the other units. I explained to Edna that without the benefit of her explanation a person at home would understand the ad to mean that all storage was half off and accused Sears of deliberately making the ad ambiguous to draw in unwitting customers. She conceded that it was reasonable for me to understand the ad to mean all garage storage was half off but refused to honor it.

I believe that the ad is incredibly misleading but wanted you guys to take a look and see if you agree. The ad is good until through Tuesday. Just wanted to warn others out there not to fall for the same trap.

Your site does consumers a great service. Keep on fighting the good fight.

Best,

Nazar

We have scrutinized the entire advertisement page and we can find nothing that would indicate that the sale applies to pictured items only. Unless the word "all" has some alternate definition, we are afraid you are the victim of false advertising. We can't say that Sears did this intentionally but at the very least, the manager made a mistake. We recommend filing a complaint with the attorney general's office in New Jersey. Here you can find the form needed to file the complaint. Maybe Sears will soon realize why ALL customers are shopping elsewhere.

The ad reads:

Did you know that there are people in this country who want prayer out of schools, "Under God" out of the Pledge, and "In God We Trust" to be taken off our money?

But did you know that 86% of Americans say they believe in God? Now, since we all know that 86 out of every 100 of us are Christians who believe in God, we at Kieffe & Sons Ford wonder why we don't just tell the other 14% to sit down and shut up. I guess maybe I just offended 14% of the people who are listening to this message. Well, if that is the case, then I say that's tough, this is America folks, it's called free speech. And none of us at Kieffe & Sons Ford are afraid to speak up. Kieffe & Sons Ford on Sierra Highway in Mojave and Rosamond: if we don't see you today, by the grace of God, we'll be here tomorrow.

The ad has been running on radio stations in southern California since at least February, according to one blogger. She wrote to Ford headquarters, but received a reply that because the dealerships are independently owned and operated, she should get in touch with the management at the dealership.

Here's the audio of (most of) the ad:

The Underground Unbeliever [via BoingBoing]
(Photo: Amy Watts)
(Audio: Karen Peralta)

At approximately 30 seconds in:

Most people seem to consider the effects of subliminal advertising negligible at best. For one thing, the guy "discovered" it actually made the whole thing up as a gimmick to get more business for his marketing research company. However, according to Wikipedia, "A study conducted by the United Nations concluded that "the cultural implications of subliminal indoctrination is a major threat to human rights throughout the world." Do you think there is a threat? Could it be possible?

Reader Jesse writes (emphasis added):

I spent a long time last night looking into the way Charter is handling this program, and based on their own explanation it's obvious that the cookie is not a "real" opt-out. Here's why.

When a customer clicks a link, advertisement, or visits a page, Charter will capture the browsing data and send it to the third-party advertising provider. If Charter wanted to offer a functional opt-out, it would be at this deep-packet inspection level. The do not offer a way out of that service, however. The only thing they offer is the cookie-based solution you've previously covered, which merely tells the third-party organization not to match the machine with the DPI-harvested data or deliver the advertising. Customer browsing is still being captured and is still being turned over regardless of anyone's individual opt-out status, but the third party is just blocked from doing anything with it by the cookie.

I might also point out that by doing this Charter is explicitly requesting that their customers choose not to follow safe browsing best practices. Every modern browser available today has an option for clearing cookies when the browser is closed, and many people choose to take advantage of this practice, myself included. Charter is either demanding that I and many others either fill out their form several dozen times per day (every time we open our browser) or specifically switch off browsing features intended to keep customers safe. Neither of these are acceptable, of course.

I am going to contact Charter's executive team again this morning on the matter, as well as an attorney. I have not been notified of Charter's changes through a letter or email, and learned about this program last night via other means. Having read through the Cable Privacy Act, which governs Charter's use of personally identifiable information, I have discovered no fewer than three potential violations. Moreover, Charter is required by law to make any collected data available to its customers, so I would suggest that all Charter customers request their DPI browsing data on a daily basis, and file appropriate complaints when they fail to deliver it as required by law.

They're not going to stop doing this until or unless they lose more money than they make on it. We have vehicles available to us to lose them vast sums of money on this project, if only the word gets out.

Subsection D of the Cable TV Privacy Act states, in part: "A cable subscriber shall be provided access to all personally identifiable information regarding that subscriber which is collected and maintained by a cable operator. Such information shall be made available to the subscriber at reasonable times and at a convenient place designated by such cable operator." It's debatable whether the data Charter is collecting is "personally identifiable information" under this statute, which excludes from the definition "any record of aggregate data which does not identify particular persons." Maybe a subpoena would clear things up.

Cable TV Privacy Act, 47 USC § 551 [Cornell Law]
(Photo: Getty)

Yesterday, McDonald’s was giving away free southern-style chicken sandwiches if you purchased a medium or large drink. I went down to the location in my office building, where there were three lines. It was busy, but nowhere near riot status.

As I stood in line, I repeatedly heard the employees telling customers that purchasing a “Sweet Tea” didn’t count for the free sandwich. Some left, some rolled their eyes and ordered a “drink” instead, but all of them were pretty peeved about it.

As it happens, someone in the line ahead of me worked for the ad agency that McDonald’s uses and said she WROTE THE AD COPY. She asked to talk to the manager, because she said that Sweet Tea was part of the promotion.

They made her wait. By the time I had ordered and was waiting for my food, two managers came out from the back looking decidedly hostile. When the ad exec tried to explain the ad to them, they immediately cut her off and shouted “No, No, No” and pretty much told her to get lost.

My curiosity was piqued, so I called McDonald’s customer service hotline to find out who was right. Guess what? The managers were completely wrong. The CSR told me “you could buy a milk chug and get a free sandwich. Any drink!” She offered me free coupons for more chicken sandwiches, but I declined because I didn’t want to give my name and address, especially since I wasn’t directly involved.

So, BOO to the local franchise managers, but way to go Customer Service Rep.

Sincerely,

Thunderpants

Nice investigative reporting, Thunderpants. It's good to know that ad agency people are forces for justice, trying to keep McDonald's honest, but it's too bad they didn't listen to her.

(Photo: Paxton Holley )

Our reaction is, of course, "Holy Shit! Where can we buy that poncho!?"

ROFLcon and ponchos spark controversy [Weekly Dig]

Reader Matt copied us on a letter he sent to Charter's VP of Customer Operations and CEO:

Dear Mr. Stackhouse,

I am a high speed internet subscriber in the Fort Worth, TX area. For the last year or so I have had Charter’s 10 Megabit service and I am a satisfied customer. I am writing, however, because I am concerned by your recent letter discussing the “enhancement” that will be coming soon to my Charter web browsing experience (targeted, in-line advertisement manipulation). I appreciate Charter’s respect for my privacy, but the method that Charter has provided to opt-out of this tracking scheme is insecure and woefully inadequate.

The method that you provide to opt-out is as follows. First, a customer must visit www.charter.com/onlineprivacy. Once at the site, the customer must enter his or her complete name and address. Upon submission of this personal information, the customer must accept a cookie from Charter that indicates his or her opt-out status. While this process sounds simple on face, further consideration reveals that this opt-out method is fraught with privacy concerns and places the burden on your paying customer, rather than Charter.

The most pressing privacy issue with this opt-out method is that the opt-out form presented at the aforementioned URL is not encrypted. As I’m sure you realize, this means that a user submitting his or her address to Charter is doing so in the clear, leaving this personal information open to eavesdropping. It is not difficult to create an SSL-encrypted web form. It is troubling that Charter has not done so in this case.

The fact that this opt-out system relies on a cookie to keep users opted out is also a privacy issue. By telling customers who visit the opt-out page that, “if you delete your cookies or cache files… you will have to opt-out again,” you are encouraging users to keep those files that good privacy practices dictate should be frequently purged. Ironically, the best reason to purge one’s cookies often is to prevent internet marketers from tracking one’s behavior online.

In addition to the critical privacy concerns, the steps required to avoid being tracked by this new advertising system place the burden on your customers, rather than on Charter where it belongs. A customer should be able to opt-out of this advertising tracking system in a manner that will rarely, if ever, require the customer to opt-out again. Instead, because the system uses cookies, a customer must insecurely opt-out of being tracked on each PC in his or her home. Further compounding the work that the customer has to do, if the he or she deletes cookies in accordance with safe browsing techniques, it will be necessary to insecurely opt-out on each and every PC again.

I suggest that rather than force your customers through unending iterations of opting out of this advertising system, you should allow customers like me to opt-out at the cable modem level via a secure, encrypted form on your website. I’m glad to hear that Charter has an appreciation for my privacy, but please change your opt-out process to demonstrate that you also have an appreciation for my time and security online.

Matt's letter focuses on the flawed opt-out clause, but the program itself, an implementation of "deep packet inspection," is more worrying to us. Deep packet inspection allows an ISP to monitor not only its users searches and visited websites, but also the type of activity (e.g., email or peer-to-peer), which could be used for traffic shaping and threatens net neutrality.

Charter to Monitor Surfing, Insert Its Own Targeted Ads [DSLReports]
(Photo: Getty)

"The 50 Greatest Commercial Parodies of All Time" [Nerve.com via Neatorama]

I guess Mo Rocca saw how good John Hodgman did with that whole Apple gig and decided to get a piece of the action himself and hook up with a major corporation for some funny videos. Unfortunately, no one seemed to warn Mo that Bank of America is a little different than Apple. Namely in that people hate Bank of America. Apple: shiny. Bank of America: vile cesspool. Mo seems like a pretty smart guy, so I hope at least he's putting his whore dollars in a credit union. Or at least somewhere better than Bank of America. A pile of dirty socks would suffice.

Mo Rocca On Banking [Official Site]

These things aren't cheap or makeshift, either.

Shortly before Thanksgiving, a furtive crew of workers for L.A. Outdoor Advertising poured a cement foundation next to the Harbor Freeway and anchored a huge metal structure into the wet cement. A few days and roughly $100,000 later, the crew had erected L.A.'s latest illegal billboard atop an equally illegal 10-ton superstructure that can be removed only with a wrecker.

for its crime, L.A. Outdoor was "cited" and "ordered" to take down the illegal billboard "immediately." Five months later, that billboard still looms large. City Hall has caved to outdoor advertisers for so many years that L.A. Outdoor is touting the illegal billboard in a photo array on its Web site — a bleak reminder that billboards run amuck here, and their owners enjoy impunity.

Clear Channel Outdoor, CBS Outdoor, Vista and others use the legal system as a delaying tactic, filing lawsuit upon lawsuit. City officials so badly fear the wrath of the billboard companies that they resisted giving L.A. Weekly basic, public facts about existing legal and illegal billboards. Plenty of U.S. cities have required the firms to hand over their inventory lists — a necessary step before activists, neighbors and inspectors can ID and dispute illegal billboards. Houston forced its billboard companies to hand over a list. So did Philadelphia and San Francisco. Florida''s Department of Transportation obtained its list — in 1972.

But in Los Angeles, the newspaper had to hire a First Amendment attorney to obtain simple information from quaking workers at the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety, a taxpayer-funded agency that deals almost exclusively in public data. For months, department spokesman Robert Steinbach refused to talk, behaving as if he were protecting the national security.

"Billboards Gone Wild: 4,000 Illegal Billboards Choke L.A.'s Neighborhoods" [LA Weekly] (Thanks to Elliott!)
(Photo: r_neches)

N.J. Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against LifeLock Alleging Deceptive Marketing Regarding Limited Level of Protection Against Identity Theft [CNBC]

Steve Lambert/Anti-Advertising Agency
c/o Eyebeam OpenLab
540 W.21st ST.
New York, NY 10011

You Don't Need It - Stickers [Anti-Advertising Agency via Don't Believe The Hypebeast]

If such a list became popular, would it reduce the ad model of the web to the blind shotgun blasts of TV advertising? That would suck—personally, if I'm going to see an ad, I want it to be about something that interests me. I don't like the idea of a third-party harvesting my data and packaging it with other users' data to profit from it, but I do think targeted advertising is an improvement over traditional advertising. Besides, how would such a list work with the rapidly evolving technologies used for data tracking? NebuAd's deep-packet-sniffing collects lots of detailed info but doesn't connect it directly to an ISP customer's account—would that be permissible?

Being a smart consumer is deeply relevant to this issue. Ultimately, the individual consumer has to understand the basics of online advertising before choosing to engage in any online behavior. Telemarketing, and to a lesser extent junk mail, take public info that by necessity has to be public (telephone numbers and addresses, for example), then exploits that info to contact you without your permission. When you're online, however, you're leaving a data trail behind you like heat exhaust, and anyone who knows how to read it can gain information on you. But you can also learn to reduce that data trail, or cloak it, or even disguise it as a different data trail. It's an arms race, but then everything in the information age is.

When companies try to take control of your data trail from you—like what Facebook did with its Beacon program—then we have a real problem; suddenly your self-protection schemes no longer work and you're left open to privacy loss. So far the public has reacted swiftly and decisively against such overreaching stunts.

My hope is that the public side of the market remains a more efficient way of dealing with company misbehavior—and that Average Web User X gets over his technophobia (or more likely plain disinterest) and learns the basics of online privacy if he values his part in the demographic data pool so much.

"Privacy Advocates: Consumer Education Isn't Enough" [PC World]

RELATED
"UK advertising-tech fight shows complexity of privacy battle" [Associated Press]
(Photo: Getty)

From the press release:

Today, SKYY® Vodka, the number-one vodka produced in the United States, spoke out against suggestions by Absolut® Vodka to disregard [the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo,] as well as the joining of Texas to the Union in 1845, as depicted in Absolut's recent advertising.

"Like SKYY Vodka, the residents of states like California, Texas and Arizona are exceptionally proud of the fact that they are from the United States of America," said Dave Karraker, SKYY Vodka. "To imply that they might be interested in changing their mailing addresses, as our competitor seems to be suggesting in their advertising, is a bit presumptuous."

We're not going to link to Skyy's full press release and further promote their PR drivel. We already feel plenty dirty having stood in the center of their messy PR circle jerk.

(Photo: just_a_name_thingie)
PREVIOUSLY: Is This Absolut Ad Cheeky Or Distasteful?
Absolut Pulls Controversial Advertisement

Verizon spokesman Eric Rabe told Dow Jones: "The ad is the one in which they have their snarly looking homeowner and Time Warner customer responding to the overly eager Verizon salesman." Verizon has asked TWC to take the ad down, but the cable company refused and is standing by it.

"We feel the suit is without merit and we look forward to defending against it in the appropriate venue," said spokesman Alex Dudley.

The ad in question pokes fun at FiOS's NYC availability issues, such as the company's lack of a video franchise agreement with the city, says Dow Jones.

UPDATE: Verizon Sues Time Warner Cable Over Its TV Ads [CNNMoney] (Thanks, Josh!)