Radiation shielding dome bed canopy.

[Matt]

Also with an ASA response in Friday forwarded to investigations team proceeding, will ask Black Radiation ltd for credible evidence of their claims....

Still nowt from trading standards. I shall charitably assume that they didn't get my complaint.

[Dubious Dick]

Also with an ASA response in Friday forwarded to investigations team proceeding, will ask Black Radiation ltd for credible evidence of their claims....

Still nowt from trading standards. I shall charitably assume that they didn't get my complaint.

Have also received a letter today from ASA saying same thing but also not heard from TS. Expect they will simply modify their claims to get away with it, but hope at least we have given them some grief.

Block as opposed to Black ...

Here is the owner of Block Radiation Ltd. One Glyn Hughes. Seems he was a telecomms engineer who also likes homeopathy.

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/glynn-hughes/24/341/84b

[Zep]

Maybe he's just not a great telecomms engineer. He's shocked himself a few times too many, it would seem.

[panama]

Following that link got me to this video-

[youtube]yfTzlBdAAEI&list=UUocRkHrwom_ZxP3GFK6OxQQ&index=7[/youtube]

there are another bunch of them...

[bindeweede]

Hi panama. I can't get your link to work. Is this the page you wanted to link to?

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=UU ... P3GFK6OxQQ

bw.

[panama]

Hi panama. I can't get your link to work. Is this the page you wanted to link to?

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=UU ... P3GFK6OxQQ

bw.

Close enough!

[Zep]

A video about people imagining silly stuff when they feel poorly, plus a bunch of wackos "discovering" all sorts of "electro smog" that appears fairly clear to me is just mains power effect on their oscilloscope leads (mains power has been around over 100 years now, chaps...). Nutters and amateur electricians.

[Dubious Dick]

While we await news from the ASA you may be interested in this related piece by Andy Lewis at Quackometer:

http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2013/03 ... -sick.html

[Dubious Dick]

Just received letter dated 22 March from ASA

'Further to my letter of 7 March, we have now received a response from Block Radiation Ltd. They have given us an assurance that all of the specific claims that you complained about will be removed, and they will seek guidance from CAP Copy Advice regarding their website in general and will follow the advice they receive. We consider that this will resolve the complaint without refreeing the matter to the ASA Council, and will consequently be closing the file.'

Well, at least it has cause doe inconvenience for Mr Hughes, the proprietor.

It will be interesting to see what changes he makes, if any, and how long it takes him to do so. Imagine he will find some weasel wording to maintain his claims but to stay withing the guidelines.

ASA really should make people like hi take down their sites until they have made amendments, or preferably stop them advertising scam products. I am also going to write to the ASA to see if they have any procedure for following up and checking compliance. I suspect not.

Next step to try to chase up the TS complaint i.e. keep up the pressure on Mr Hughes.

[Matt]

Yes I received similar. Though mine told me that there would be something published on their website in early April and for some reason I imagined that this meant that their usual embargo applied. I suspect our claims sit alongside each other in the same folder.

Anyway I'm glad to report that the ASA do have a follow-up procedure. I know this because I have previously complained against a site that had already been adjudicated against and the ASA told me how they follow these up. Basicly those who don't comply are noted after a fixed period of time and then warned that if they don't comply by a second deadline they will be put on the naughty list. If during the subsequent check the site is put on this list then sanctions come into effect.

Unfortunately these sanctions are currently quite minor. The ASA is voluntary industry self regulation so has no statutory powers to levy fines or enforce orders. However part of this voluntary adherence to the CAP code is that respectable members of the advertising industry will not carry advertising promoting the products and services of companies on the ASA's list on non-compliant advertisers. At the time I was informed about this, the ASA were working towards extending this industry shunning to the search engines. Firstly to block sponsored links from infracting websites and secondly to apply a ranking penalty which would push them down the list of returned results.

Unless or until this starts to affect their search engine traffic, advertisers like Mr Hughes can probably live with the fact that Vogue would reject their order for a full page colour glossy and spend that £50,000 on something else instead. Like 10,000 SEO gigs on Fiverr

[Dubious Dick]

Yes I received similar. Though mine told me that there would be something published on their website in early April and for some reason I imagined that this meant that their usual embargo applied. I suspect our claims sit alongside each other in the same folder.

Anyway I'm glad to report that the ASA do have a follow-up procedure. I know this because I have previously complained against a site that had already been adjudicated against and the ASA told me how they follow these up. Basicly those who don't comply are noted after a fixed period of time and then warned that if they don't comply by a second deadline they will be put on the naughty list. If during the subsequent check the site is put on this list then sanctions come into effect.

Unfortunately these sanctions are currently quite minor. The ASA is voluntary industry self regulation so has no statutory powers to levy fines or enforce orders. However part of this voluntary adherence to the CAP code is that respectable members of the advertising industry will not carry advertising promoting the products and services of companies on the ASA's list on non-compliant advertisers. At the time I was informed about this, the ASA were working towards extending this industry shunning to the search engines. Firstly to block sponsored links from infracting websites and secondly to apply a ranking penalty which would push them down the list of returned results.

Unless or until this starts to affect their search engine traffic, advertisers like Mr Hughes can probably live with the fact that Vogue would reject their order for a full page colour glossy and spend that £50,000 on something else instead. Like 10,000 SEO gigs on Fiverr

Do I take it from this that it would require us or others to complain about lack of compliance in order to get the ASA to swing into the fairly minimal action you describe as their follow up procedures?

Why oh why oh why do Government after Government play this patently absurd game of allowing scamsters to get away with such light touch regulation and sanction? Without substantive enforcement and sanctions it is all just so much fluff really. Would be dispiriting if I wasn't such a bloody minded fool.

[Matt]

No the ASA told me that the follow-up had already taken place prior to my enquiry and that the site in question was already on the naughty list so no additional complaints required. This seems to fit with general advise from the activists such as the nightingale campaign that the ASA don't take much prodding to act (so advising against multiple complaints) but that Trading Standards (the body that has the power to apply sanctions that bite) will swing into action only after receiving a number of enquiries.

I suppose that kinda makes sense. The ASA wields a legion of pea shooters and fires pretty indiscriminately whilst the gunboat diplomacy of trading standards, being of far more serious consequence, needs to be wielded with more care and attention and moreover with greater discretion. To be fair to them the the problem isn't light touch legislation, its scaling back the resources afforded to the enforcement body who has to prioritise mobile phone accessories that will burn your house down over those that fail to solve an imaginary problem.