October 12th, 2011

London Weight Management’s parent company replies

On September 30, AWARE sent letters of complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority Of Singapore (ASAS), the Media Development Authority (MDA), MediaCorp, and London Weight Management’s parent company AMES United regarding the slimming chain’s recent controversial TV commercial. Read our letter here.

On October 7, we received a reply from MDA, which stated that MDA has received complaints about the advertisement and has been communicating with ASAS and MediaCorp about the public’s concerns.

AMES United also replied to AWARE in a letter dated October 7, which is reproduced in full below:

Dear Mdm,

Re: London Weight Management Television Advertisement

We refer to your letter dated 30.09.2011

We thank you for taking your time to communicate with us in regards to the above advertisement.

In response to your letter, we wish to inform you that our campaign had ended at this point of time and the said advertisement will no longer be aired on TV.

We have taken note of the Guidelines III Code of Advertising Practice that states as follows:-

“advertisements should not contain or refer to any testimonial or endorsement unless it is genuine and related to the personal experience of the party who provided the testimonial or endorsement“.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,
Evon Ng
Chief Operating Officer

One Comment ...

  1. Elsie

    London Weight Management just refuses to admit that it made a mistake here.

    Their defence is pathetic and dishonest.

    While Para 3.1 does state that “advertisements should not contain or refer to any testimonial or endorsement unless it is genuine and related to the personal experience of the party who provided the testimonial or endorsement“.

    London Weight Management deliberately omits to state that Para 3.4 provides that:

    “3.4 Testimonials or endorsements that are exceptional experiences (i.e. which do not reflect the experience that an average user of the product would ordinarily expect to have) should not be used.

    Advertisers and advertising agencies are required to show substantiation that such testimonials or endorsements do indeed reflect the typical experience of ordinary users.”

    Why would anyone patronise a company that blatantly resorts to telling half truths?

    #2871