Watchdog rules against Greenpeace Rena ad
The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint about a Greenpeace that claimed the Rena oil spill killed 20,000 birds.
The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint about a Greenpeace that claimed the Rena oil spill killed 20,000 birds.
The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint about a Greenpeace that claimed the Rena oil spill killed 20,000 birds.
In a decision made on March 6 and just released to media, the watchdog upheld a complaint over the claimed avian death count.
Greenpeace said its total was based on UK and US research which found birds recovered represented around 10% of total fatalities in an oil spill.
The ASA's Complaints Board said that the statement “20,000 were killed” was "a very strong statement and in its view was a long bow to draw" - particularly when the practice was based on research which would involve different bird breeds and populations to name just a few variables.
The board said the advertiser was assuming a lot of the consumer to understand that the figure purported as fact in the advertisement had been derived in such a manner.
As such, the ASA said the Greenpeace ad was likely to mislead and deceive consumers.
It found a second Greepeace claim in the same advertisement, that "Deep sea oil drilling could be 1000 times worse", was not a breach of its code of ethics.
"The advertisement was clearly identifiable as a Greenpeace advertisement advocating their stance on the topical oil issue.
"It added that, generally, consumers have a clear knowledge of the Greenpeace cause, and therefore the advertisement was clearly an example of advocacy advertising," the board found.
"Expression of opinion in advocacy advertising is an essential and desirable part of the functioning of a democratic society."
The Greenpeace ad was created by Publicis Mojo.
In its defence, Greenpeace said the complainant, Bryan Leyland, was a known "climate change denier", which raised questions about this motivation.