******************************************
Following is issued on behalf of the Broadcasting Authority:
In November, the Broadcasting Authority (BA) approved the application by Asia Times Online Limited for a non-domestic television programme service licence for a period of validity of 12 years, from November 24, 2007, to November 23, 2019 (both dates inclusive). There are now altogether 16 non-domestic television programme service licensees in Hong Kong providing 148 satellite television channels targeting viewers in the Asia Pacific region, of which 40 channels are available for reception in Hong Kong.
In October 2007, the BA considered two complaint cases concerning two public complaints. The first case was about the television advertisement for "Wyeth Gold Milk Powder" broadcast on the Jade Channel of Television Broadcasts Limited on November 29, 2006, at 12.59pm. The second case was about the television programme "Finance Tea Show" broadcast on the Home Channel of Asia Television Limited on July 20, 2007, from 2.35pm to 3.05pm. Please see appendix for details.
The BA also noted that in October 2007, the Commissioner for Television and Entertainment Licensing dealt with 94 cases (300 complaints) under her delegated authority, of which five cases (five complaints) were classified as minor breaches, and 66 cases (270 complaints) as unsubstantiated, under section 11 of the Broadcasting Authority Ordinance. Twenty-three cases (25 complaints) were outside section 11 of the ordinance. Please refer to the BA website: www.hkba.hk for details of the complaints.
Appendix: Summary of Complaint Cases
Case 1 - Television advertisement for "Wyeth Gold Milk Powder" broadcast on the Jade Channel of Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB) on November 29, 2006, at 12.59pm.
A member of the public complained that the advertising claim "Lutein，配合埋DHA助長小朋友視覺感觀發展" (Lutein together with DHA promotes the visual development of children) was not supported by scientific evidence and was misleading, in particular, the relevance of lutein to the eyes of infants or young children.
The BA considered that the claim "Lutein，配合埋DHA助長小朋友視覺感觀發展" (Lutein together with DHA promotes the visual development of children) in the advertisement was a factual claim which required substantiation. The BA examined and noted the information supplied by TVB and the advertiser in support of the claim. The BA also noted that the Department of Health (DoH), having reviewed the same information, advised that the claim was not supported by any scientific evidence that the intake of formula milk with lutein and DHA effectively improved children's eye health and development. The BA considered that the causal relationships between supplementary intake of lutein and eye health and visual development of children were weak while the phrase "助長" (promote) in the claim under concern stressed the effectiveness of lutein on children's eye development.
Regarding whether TVB had exercised reasonable diligence to ascertain the truthfulness of the factual claim, the BA noted that apart from the information provided by the advertiser, TVB had tried to obtain supporting information about the benefits of lutein from different sources. The BA, however, considered that as the advertised product was manufactured for the consumption of young children and since the claim concerned mentioned the effect of the advertised product on the eye development of young children, TVB should have been more careful in verifying the truthfulness of the claim.
TVB was strongly advised to observe paragraph 9 of Chapter 3 and paragraphs 1 and 5 of Chapter 4 of the Generic Code of Practice on Television Advertising Standards.
Case 2 - Television programme "Finance Tea Show" broadcast on the Home Channel of Asia Television Limited (ATV) on July 20, 2007, from 2.35pm to 3.05pm.
A member of the public complained that the programme host's references to a tour in the programme promoted a commercial travel package.
The BA noted that (i) the programme under concern was a financial programme featuring market analysis, stock prices and investment tips by financial experts; (ii) in the edition under complaint, the host, on two occasions, made references to a tour in Tibet and the departure date of the tour. In addition, the host mentioned twice that there were only a few vacancies left on the tour and interested viewers were invited to join it. The telephone number for registration or for enquiry on the tour was repeated several times and interested viewers were invited to make a call. The host also promoted an activity to visit a cordyceps farm in the tour as an attraction. A flipcard listing the departure date, information about the tour, a registration hotline number and photographs of some scenic spots in Tibet were shown on screen in the programme; and (iii) the hotline under concern was the telephone number of a travel agency; and the information shown on the flipcard displayed on screen in the programme could also be found on the information sheet about the tour on the agency's website.
The BA considered that references to products or services of a commercial nature in a programme had to be limited to what could be justified by editorial requirements or of an incidental nature. As presented in the programme, the host's repeated references to the tour were not contextually justified, and had given undue prominence to the commercial travel package, which amounted to indirect advertising.
ATV was strongly advised to observe paragraphs 1 and 3 of Chapter 11 of the Generic Code of Practice on Television Programme Standards.
Ends/Friday, November 30, 2007
Issued at HKT 14:50
NNNN
