AT&T has taken an unusual step, suing the National Advertising Division (NAD), a watchdog group that regulates advertising claims in the US industry. The NAD had previously ordered AT&T to stop using its decisions and findings for promotional purposes, including running TV ads criticizing T-Mobile.
In response, AT&T claims it didn't violate the rule by issuing video advertisements and press releases referencing NAD decisions. Instead, AT&T argues that only announcements of specific NAD decisions themselves are barred from advertising and promotional use. The company says that since its press release announcing its new ad campaign did not mention a particular decision, it's not a violation.
However, the NAD counters that AT&T's actions were still improper, as the press release could be seen as referencing NAD decisions for promotional purposes. This is despite the fact that AT&T claims to have made only a short reference and simply stated the number of rulings against T-Mobile without specifying any particular decision.
AT&T's lawsuit argues that the rule prohibiting the use of NAD decisions in advertising only applies after the ruling itself has been issued, which means the press release should not be considered a promotional item. The company also claims that the NAD process is slow and often allows companies like T-Mobile to continue misleading ads without consequences.
This dispute highlights the complexities of self-regulation in the US advertising industry. While AT&T and T-Mobile have both faced criticism for their advertisements, AT&T's actions seem to be more contentious than its rival. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how advertisers use NAD decisions and press releases in future marketing campaigns.
In essence, AT&T is claiming that the NAD's actions are too vague and restrictive, and that the group has been unfairly targeting companies like T-Mobile. However, the NAD maintains that its rules are clear and that AT&T's actions were a direct violation of those rules. The dispute now lies in court, where a judge will have to decide whether AT&T's claims are valid or not.
As both AT&T and T-Mobile continue to make misleading ads, consumers may want to be cautious when considering which carrier to use. While the NAD is designed to regulate advertising claims, it seems that AT&T is trying to exploit loopholes in the system to promote its own interests.
In response, AT&T claims it didn't violate the rule by issuing video advertisements and press releases referencing NAD decisions. Instead, AT&T argues that only announcements of specific NAD decisions themselves are barred from advertising and promotional use. The company says that since its press release announcing its new ad campaign did not mention a particular decision, it's not a violation.
However, the NAD counters that AT&T's actions were still improper, as the press release could be seen as referencing NAD decisions for promotional purposes. This is despite the fact that AT&T claims to have made only a short reference and simply stated the number of rulings against T-Mobile without specifying any particular decision.
AT&T's lawsuit argues that the rule prohibiting the use of NAD decisions in advertising only applies after the ruling itself has been issued, which means the press release should not be considered a promotional item. The company also claims that the NAD process is slow and often allows companies like T-Mobile to continue misleading ads without consequences.
This dispute highlights the complexities of self-regulation in the US advertising industry. While AT&T and T-Mobile have both faced criticism for their advertisements, AT&T's actions seem to be more contentious than its rival. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how advertisers use NAD decisions and press releases in future marketing campaigns.
In essence, AT&T is claiming that the NAD's actions are too vague and restrictive, and that the group has been unfairly targeting companies like T-Mobile. However, the NAD maintains that its rules are clear and that AT&T's actions were a direct violation of those rules. The dispute now lies in court, where a judge will have to decide whether AT&T's claims are valid or not.
As both AT&T and T-Mobile continue to make misleading ads, consumers may want to be cautious when considering which carrier to use. While the NAD is designed to regulate advertising claims, it seems that AT&T is trying to exploit loopholes in the system to promote its own interests.
! I mean, can't they just be honest with us? 
The NAD has a good thing going, and AT&T is basically trying to work around it. It's not like this is the first time we've seen these kinds of misleading ads... I'm so tired of having to sift through all the BS 
. Can't we just have some transparency in our advertising? 
. If AT&T didn't specifically mention a particular decision, then shouldn't they be able to use it as a way to say "Hey, we're not just making this up, this has been decided by an independent body"? It also seems like T-Mobile is being kind of petty if they're getting all upset about AT&T using NAD decisions in their press releases 
. Anyway, I hope the judge weighs everything and gives a clear answer to this whole thing 
. The NAD's rules might be slow, but at least they're trying to keep the industry in check. Consumers deserve to know what's really going on when they see those ads 
.
Can't these companies just play by the rules already?! 
It's just not right.
It's just not fair. The NAD needs to stand firm on this one. They can't let companies like AT&T walk all over them like this.
Is that too much to ask?!
. I mean, who comes up with these rules? It's like, if you're gonna make a press release announcing a new ad campaign, shouldn't it be clear that it's not just a random statement? 
. I get it, they're trying to balance regulation with giving companies the freedom to advertise, but sometimes you've got to draw a line in the sand 
.
. As a consumer, it's our job to stay vigilant and fact-check everything we see 
. But now AT&T is trying to use this loophole to get away with basically the same thing? No thanks, man 
.
.
.
. the fact that they're suing nad makes me think they're not as confident in their ad campaign as they thought 
It's not like AT&T is being completely transparent about its actions... I mean, the press release could totally be seen as referencing NAD decisions without even realizing it 
It feels like AT&T is trying to find loopholes in the system so it can promote itself without getting caught 