Telkom ordered to withdraw advert in row with Safaricom

Telkom Kenya's Orange advert that Safaricom is contesting. Photo/FILE   

By BD REPORTER

In Summary

• Telkom Kenya advert uses a green SIM card similar to those of Safaricom.
• Safaricom’s media and creative agency Scanad filed complaint in January.
• It said the advert was misleading

Telkom Kenya has been ordered to withdraw an advert that depicts Safaricom as an expensive network.

The Advertising Standards Committee (ASC) reckons that Telkom Kenya’s aggressive advertising was not based on facts and is in breach of the publicity code that bars adverts that criticise a rival’s products and services.

Telkom Kenya went on the war path on January 8 in a commercial that uses a green SIM card similar to those of Safaricom to depict the rival as the most expensive network while using its orange corporate colour to show its network as the cheapest.

This prompted a complaint from Safaricom’s creative and media agency, Scanad on January 28 that resulted in the April 16 judgment by ASC, a self-regulatory body for advertising content under the Marketing Society of Kenya.

“This claim is misleading and should be withdrawn from the mediums it is run or edited in the manner stated hereafter.’’

“The ad should be reworded to make it clear that it is a peak time comparison as opposed to a general comparison with an asterisk in small text to qualify the same.”

At the heart of the ad dispute is the assertion by Telkom that calls from Safaricom are pegged at Sh4 a minute while it charges Sh3 to reach rival networks and Sh2 between its subscribers.

READ: Safaricom fights Telkom advert in market share war

Safaricom reckoned that the advert was misleading since it charges Sh2 a minute during off peak hours, which run between 10pm and 8 am.

“It was the claimant (Safaricom) submission that the advert was deceptive and was calculated to disparage Safaricom,” reads the ASC judgment.

The Telkom Kenya advert also breached the advertising code that calls for comparison of similar products and on facts.

The committee mentioned that off peak element in Safaricom products meant they were not similar.

“Comparisons highlighting a weakness in an industry or product will not necessarily be regarded as disparaging when the information is factual…and remains as subtle and decent as possible,” says ASC code.

Kenya’s commercial law is silent on this type of advertising, but verdicts reached by the ASC can be enforced in court.

“The verdict is binding like a contract because both parties agreed to face the committee as a mediator,” says John Ohaga, the managing partner of Trippleolaw Advocates