Advertisements

HC Deb 11 March 1959 vol 601 cc1232-41

13. Mr. Chapman

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that, during the screening of the play, "Hot Summer Night", recently on Independent Television, an artificial break was made in the play for advertisements, the action being stopped at a climax with a character talking from the top of some stairs and being resumed with the character again talking and descending the stairs; and, as this is a breach of the Television Act, what action he is taking against the Independent Television Authority.

The Postmaster-General (Mr. Ernest Marples)

The Authority does not regard this break as natural and instructed the programme company the following day that breaks of this kind, though perhaps suitable in the theatre, could not be allowed in its transmission under the Act's "natural break" rule. It has emphasised this to all the companies.

Mr. Chapman

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am glad that one of these practices is condemned by him? Has he seen the Gallup Poll which shows that viewers in a proportion of three to one dislike the intrusion of advertisements into programmes in unnatural breaks? How long are these gentlemen to get away with it? If the right hon. Gentleman wants an all-party agreement on the extent of the intrusion of advertisements into programmes, would not it be a good idea to direct the I.T.A. to go some way to meet our point of view?

Mr. Marples

In this case, the I.T.A. has condemned the mistake without reservation. It has cautioned the particular company and it has informed other companies. I doubt whether we shall ever have complete all-party agreement on commercial television.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the pleasure it has given us that a Daniel has at last come to judgment?

Mr. Marples

Not a bit of it. This really shows that the Authority is doing its job.

14. Mr. Chapman

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that at 6.15 p.m., approximately, on Saturday, 14th February, a singer on Independent Television was apparently faded out before the end of his song in order to insert advertisements; and, as this is a breach of the Television Act, what action he is taking against the Independent Television Authority.

Mr. Marples

The Authority tells me that the hon. Member is mistaken in thinking that the singer was faded out to make room for advertisements. The presentation technique for this particular song allowed for the final words to die away deliberately as they are repeated several times. I understand that the same technique is employed in a gramophone record of the song in question.

Mr. Chapman

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is just another example of the way in which these programmes are being manipulated so as best to allow the intrusion of advertisements in the middle of them? Would not it be a good thing, in view of the extent of public opinion, as shown in the Gallup Poll, to instruct the I.T.A. to go at least some way to meet these criticisms that there are too many unnatural breaks in the programmes?

Mr. Marples

That supplementary question is based on the assumption that it was an unnatural break at that point. I have listened to the gramophone record which has gone on sale. I have it downstairs in my room with a gramophone. I am quite prepared for the hon. Member or any other hon. Member to listen to it, because the treatment of the song on television was precisely the same as its treatment on the gramophone record. The song is called, "Real Wild Child". It was sung by a man called Ivan and it fades away with "Wild child, wild child, wild child." I have listened to the gramophone record, which is more than the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Chapman) has done.

Sir R. Grimston

In order to get some sense of proportion on this matter, may I ask whether my Tight hon. Friend has seen the letter which appeared in today's Times, written by a gentleman who has made some researches into this matter? The conclusions he has reached are that the complaints come almost entirely either from people who have no television sets or those who have sets which will receive only the B.B.C. programmes?

Mr. Marples

I have read the letter with great interest, especially as the gentleman has made some scientific investigations.

Mr. Shinwell

If we avail ourselves of the invitation extended by the right hon. Gentleman to come to his room to hear this gramophone record, will he put on a little liquid refreshment?

Mr. Marples

The Post Office does not finance those things.

15. Mr. Chapman

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that, contrary to the rules laid down by the Independent Television Authority about the use of statistics in advertisements, claims are being made that a particular bread is exactly eight times more good for the viewer than any other bread, that a particular sweetmeat is seven times less fattening than ordinary chocolate, and that a particular oil reduces engine wear by exactly 80 per cent.; and whether he will issue regulations under Section 4 (4) of the Television Act to make sure that the Independent Television Authority enforces rules about this misleading use of figures.

Mr. Marples

It is a matter for the Authority to ensure compliance with its "Principles for Television Advertising". In general advertisements in which there is doubt are referred to the Authority by the programme companies. If the Authority is in doubt it refers them to its Advertising Advisory Committee. These advertisements were not so referred, and in view of the hon. Member's allegation I have asked the Authority to obtain the opinion of the Committee.

The answer to the last part of the Question is "No, Sir".

Mr. Chapman

I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman. We are making progress. He is being kind in asking for this matter to be investigated. May I draw his attention to the fact that when an ordinary citizen wrote to the advertiser about the claim in regard to engine wear, and asked him to substantiate the claim, in reply the advertiser evaded the question about substantiating the figure of 80 per cent. That figure, of course, meant that an engine would last five times as long as any other engine which was not using his oil. Does not the Minister agree that, if that kind of thing happens, it ought to be stopped as soon as possible?

Mr. Marples

I have no doubt that the Advertising Advisory Committee will read HANSARD in respect of the Answer to this and also the previous Question.

Mr. Gower

Has the attention of my right hon. Friend been drawn to an advertisement which exaggerated a great deal by pretending that Labour could meet Britain's needs in the future?

Mr. C. R. Hobson

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reply to the Question presupposes the fact that the advertisements are not submitted by the programme companies to the I.T.A.? Indeed, he admits that.

Mr. Marples

That is not so. I will read my reply again so that the hon. Gentleman gets it right. In general, advertisements in which there is doubt are referred to the Authority by the programme companies. In this case the programme company did not think there was doubt, but as an hon. Member of this House has said to the Postmaster-General that there is doubt, I have taken his allegation at its face value and I have tried to meet his point by referring it to the Committee, which I thought was reasonable.

27. Sir L. Plummer

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of complaints by professional bodies and individuals that advertisers are making extravagant claims for their products on Independent Television, he will make regulations under Sections 4 (4) and 4 (5) of the Television Act that any such claim must be capable of proof and demonstration before an independent committee.

Mr. Marples

One of the functions of the Authority's Advertising Advisory Committee is to give advice to the Authority and programme contractors with a view to the exclusion of misleading advertisements. Such advice has been given and acted upon. I see no need therefore for regulations by me under Section 4 (4) or directions under Section 4 (5).

Sir L. Plummer

Is the Postmaster-General aware that when his predecessor announced the setting up of the Advertising Advisory Committee, he allayed the fears of a large number of hon. Members as to whether exaggerated claims would be made. Now, demonstrably, exaggerated claims are being made, so will he now look at the constitution of the Advertising Advisory Committee to see whether it is advisable to have representatives of advertising agents on it?

Mr. Marples

I am satisfied with the composition of the Advertising Advisory Committee, which is a responsible body of experts drawn from all spheres of life. The B.M.A., the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, the Ministry of Health and the veterinary surgeons, all are represented on this body. I am certain that they are expert and efficient. If the hon. Gentleman has any specific exaggerations in mind, I will do what I did for the hon. Gentleman the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Chapman), and refer them to the Advertising Advisory Committee.

Mr. Woodburn

The right hon. Gentleman has referred to the advice of medical experts. In the case of the engineering claim that a particular oil saves 80 per cent. in the wear of an engine, surely medical people are not the best to advise him on that point?

Mr. Marples

No, Sir, but we cannot have a representative from every profession and industry in the country on that Committee. It would be a very unwieldy body if we did that. However, the Committee can always seek advice from outside experts, and I am sure it will do that.

28. Mr. Ness Edwards

asked the Postmaster-General what consultations have taken place under Section 4 (5) of the Television Act, 1954, between the Independent Television Authority and himself relating to advertisements; and how many directions he has given to the Authority as provided for in Section 4 (5).

Mr. Marples

On 22nd June, 1955, my predecessor told the House that he had approved the "Principles for Television Advertising" in so far as they related to matters falling within his jurisdiction under Section 4 (5) of the Act. Since then the Authority has consulted me formally about the advertising of four different items. In each case I was m agreement with the Authority's proposals and therefore no need for directions from me arose.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there have been conflicts over the Floor of this House about his powers in this matter? Does not he recognise that he has power to issue directions to the Independent Television Authority, in any case in which he thinks fit, under Section 4 (5) of the Act, and may we have it clearly stated now that the right hon. Gentleman accepts some responsibility in this matter?

Mr. Marples

The Television Act seems to be capable of infinite interpretation by different hon. Members. Section 4 (5) relates to consultation on admissible classes of goods and services. In those cases where the Independent Television Authority has consulted me, I have done my best to look at the point dispassionately, and in the last two years we have taken out four items which were inadmissible.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is a matter of great consequence? Will be consult subsection (5) again, which lays down specifically both the type of goods and the methods of advertising in respect of which he has power to give directions?

Mr. Marples

Section 4 (5) calls for consultation with the Postmaster-General as to the classes and description of goods and services which must not be advertised and the methods of advertising which must not be employed, and calls on the Authority to carry out any directions he may give in those respects. I am quite satisfied that at the moment the Authority is carrying out its duty of consulting me on any possibly inadmissible case.

29. Mr. Ness Edwards

asked the Postmaster-General on what date the Independent Television Authority decided that certain toothpaste advertisements offended against the rules approved by him; and on what date those advertisements ceased to be transmitted.

Mr. Marples

The Authority tells me that one advertiser on being asked to substantiate his claims, or to revise his script, withdrew his advertising as from 1st January this year. Another asked to amend his script on 27th January is revising his advertisement. The present advertisement will not appear after the end of this week.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that in December the Advisory Committee decided that these advertisements ought to be withdrawn? Why was it that the I.T.A. gave the advertisers a few weeks in which to withdraw their advertisements?

Mr. Marples

That is another question. Personally, I am of the opinion that it was too long a time and in that I agree with the right hon. Gentleman. However, I must ask the House to remember that this discrimination refers only to television advertising and that the same advertisements have been carried by newspapers of all descriptions. The same advertisement has appeared in a variety of newspapers, including the Daily Mirror and the People. The Television Authority is more scrupulous about its advertisements than any other body I know.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is not responsible for newspapers but is responsible for television advertising?

Mr. Marples

I do not know who is responsible for the newspapers I have mentioned.

Mr. F. Noel-Baker

Are we right in assuming that the toothpastes to which the right hon. Gentleman refers are Colgate and Gleam? Why is it that the objections to these advertisements were brought to his attention and to that of the House on 21st November when evidence was given in the debate of that day of the grave apprehensions of the dental profession, and that nothing was done about the matter until January?

Mr. Marples

The Advertising Advisory Committee discussed this matter on 20th October. It was called to the Committee's attention by a member of the British Dental Association who is on the Committee. The Committee considered it before it was mentioned in the House. I do not think that it is right and proper to mention individual firms in the House.

33. Mr. Mayhew

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the Independent Television Authority permits eight minutes and more of advertising an hour when serious programmes are broadcast and if he will make regulations under Section 4 and Schedule 2 to the Television Act to limit the amount of advertising time.

Mr. Marples

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply my hon. Friend gave the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Chapman) on 4th March.

Mr. Mayhew

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that reply gave the impression that the reason why more than six minutes' advertising was allowed was the nature and length of the programmes, whereas in fact it depends on whether or not the programme is shown at peak hours or off-peak hours? Will he correct that impression, since the true reason for excessive advertising is that the programme contractors find it more profitable to advertise at peak hours?

Mr. Marples

A lot depends on the nature of the programme being transmitted. At present the transmitted programmes average between 60 and 65 hours, and between January and February on up to eight occasions there were six advertisements lasting for eight minutes, there was one lasting eight and a half minutes, and on two occasions at the most they lasted more than nine minutes, all depending on the nature of the programme.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are far more breaks at peak times than during low viewing times? How does it come about that it is a regular occurrence for more breaks and more time devoted to advertisements to come in peak periods rather than at any other time?

Mr. Marples

The curious thing is that there is no complaint from the general public. Where people can view I.T.A. and B.B.C., of the time spent in viewing twice as much is spent watching I.T.A. as B.B.C. If people object, they can switch to the station where there is no advertising.

Mr. Ness Edwards

But that is no excuse for breaking the law.

Mr. Mayhew

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a Gallup Poll on Tuesday showed that 81 per cent. of I.T.A. viewers were annoyed by the breaks and that the vast majority of I.T.A. viewers pronounced themselves in favour of the Bill which I am presenting to the House? Would he agree that it would be a shame if that Bill were killed without the House being given an opportunity to discuss it?

Mr. Marples

I should hate to see any Bill of the hon. Gentleman's killed. In reply to this reference to the Gallup Pall, there is a letter in The Times today from Mr. Geoffrey Gorer, who carried out 2,000 scientific investigations and who found that the people he interviewed did not really mind about advertisements.

Mr. H. Morrison

Does the Postmaster-General mean that the results of the Gallup Poll are not worthy of consideration and that the poll is unreliable? Is he repudiating it altogether? All of us have doubts about the Gallup Polls from time to time, especially when they are not favourable to us, but surely the Gallup Poll has sufficient reputation not to be treated in the contemptuous manner which the Postmaster-General has shown.

Mr. Marples

I have not treated it in a contemptuous manner. I said that there was another poll which gave different results, and I have to balance the one against the other.

35. Mr. Freeth

asked the Postmaster-General to what extent he has received specific complaints from the general public about the rules relating to natural breaks in Independent Television Authority programmes.

Mr. Marples

I have seen the News Chronicle Gallup Poll based on specific questions. As regards spontaneous complaints from the general public I have received since 1st December, 1958, four letters of criticism about the insertion of advertisements in natural breaks. For two years prior to that date I received none.

Mr. Freeth

Would my right hon. Friend infer from that information that there is no strong public agitation? Is not it confined to right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite?

Mr. Marples

I think that that is the right conclusion.

Mr. Mayhew

Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the replies to protests from viewers about natural breaks are now sent out by I.T.A. in duplicated letters?

Mr. Marples

I shall have to have notice of that supplementary question. I do not know the answer myself.

36. Mr. Freeth

asked the Postmaster-General what evidence he has that viewers are dissatisfied with the way in which, under the rules contained in the Second Schedule to the Television Act, 1954, advertisements are inserted in Independent Television Authority programmes.

Mr. Marples

I have received in the last six months four letters only from the general public. They have all come in since 1st December. The Authority itself has had five letters from the public. It tells me that its audiences are as large as ever, and that at least two-thirds of the time spent viewing television in homes with a choice is given to the Independent Television programmes.

Mr. Freeth

Does my right hon. Friend, therefore, agree that there is no case for amending legislation further to restrict the programme contractors as to the places where they insert advertisements into their programmes?

Mr. Marples

I think that the introduction of Independent Television has had a beneficial effect on television as a whole.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are not asking for new legislation; we are asking that the provisions of the present legislation shall be faithfully carried out?

Mr. Marples

The right hon. Gentleman was against the present legislation at the beginning, and has been ever since. I am satisfied that its provisions have been carried out efficiently and well.