The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority banned a wood smoke pollution awareness ad by Brighton and Hove City Council. This happened despite strong evidence and expert opinion supporting the ad’s messaging.
In the ad, an image of smoke from a wood stove formed the shape of an adult and a child. Text in a cloud of smoke above the figures said: “Harmful particle pollution near 4 city primary schools was 78% higher last winter compared with last summer.” Underneath, it said, “Wood burners and open fires. The cosy killer.”
The ASA ruled that the increase in pollution could not be directly tied to wood burners.
Brighton and Hove City Council had submitted supporting evidence that included air monitoring data, peer-reviewed studies and, according to the ASA, “a memorandum of scientific support from an academic who specialised in air pollution, which stated agreement with the messaging in the ad campaign, and that the results were consistent with the burning of wood and solid fuel.”
In coverage of the ruling by The BMJ, author Sophie Borland noted:
The ruling has dismayed public health experts and campaigners, who fear that it will have a ‘cooling effect’ on other local authorities and will put them off launching their own public health campaigns.
The BMJ has previously covered how the wood stove industry attempts to silence public health messaging efforts against wood burning. In the case of this ruling, complaints to the ASA had come from a wood stove seller and a chimney sweep.
In a post on the website of a prominent legal firm, experts in advertising law discussed the ruling. They described the ASA’s reasoning behind the decision as “genuinely troubling.” They noted:
When an advertiser produces Defra data, peer-reviewed studies, expert academic support, and a systematic elimination of alternative causes, but the ASA still concludes the evidence is insufficient, one has to ask what would be enough? And having given a 'free-hit' to the complainant, regardless of his vested interest, the ASA risks finding itself on the same side of the debate as the climate-change deniers…
We add our voices to the others who are dismayed by this ASA decision.
