Re: [APD] Truth in Advertising

[Stuart Halliday <stuart at stuarthalliday_com>]

I believe RMGTBTS at aol_com wrote this email section below:
> IMHO if a publication could reasonably be expected to know that the content  
> of an advertisement is questionable as to accuracy then they should not run 
> the  ad without investigating the company/individual wanting to purchase the ad.
> And  if that investigation turns up information that the company is not 
> reputable,  they don't sell ad space.

That advert reminds me of another current one.
This is about a magnetic device sold to aquarists that is suppose to clean your Aquarium
water as it passes through the tube (which is full of powerful magnets), make your plants
look and grow better, fish healthier, etc. for you.

Lots of reputable Aquarium magazines still published the advert.
I remember looking at their web site and having a good laugh.


Back in the real world...
Quite often the advertising department of a magazine has nothing to do with its Editor
and writers. So a Editor will never see the adverts before publication and even if they do
its usually 2-3 months afterwards.

So when the Mag get an advert for printing, the ad dept. don't know if it's pants as they're
not  technically competent to evaluate it. So it goes in.
If no one from the public complains then it will stay in.

In the UK we have the Advertising Standard Board. If you complain to them, they review it
and tell the owners of the advert (not the magazine) to stop.

A close friend of mine did this many years ago to Apple inc. when it published a number of
lies about its computers. Must have cost Apple a pretty penny to redo the adverts...

-- 
Stuart Halliday
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants