So the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus ruled that Cingular does in fact have the “fastest national wireless data network” and “the largest push-to-talk network in America.” The National Advertising Division also said the nation’s largest wireless operator could claim to have “more bars in more places.” I can almost hear Cingular’s Stan Sigman sighing in relief.
But before we go into the details of these important decisions, let me first point out that the National Advertising Division has the extremely unfortunate acronym of NAD. I can’t believe that a bunch of savvy advertising people actually agreed to the acronym of NAD. I mean, NAD? NAD NAD NAD. Hilarious.
(If you don’t know why I think this is funny, just say the word “nad” to any 12-year-old boy and then ask him why he’s laughing. This should also give you some insight into my level of maturity.)
Although NAD said Cingular does indeed have more bars in more places (my question is: Where are these bars, and what’s on tap?), NAD refuted other Cingular marketing messages. NAD said Cingular does not offer “the broadest and deepest portfolio of wireless business solutions” and Cingular’s people and partners actually do not “make wireless work for more businesses than any other wireless carrier.” Somewhere, I can hear Mr. Sigman saying, “D’oh!”
Following its ruling, NAD then mobilized a highly trained team of crack advertising enforcement officers to take down Cingular’s offending ads-by ANY means necessary… (That’s not true, I just made that part up. But wouldn’t that be cool?)
OK, now on to my point: All these squabbles over advertising claims are just nonsense. I mean, who even takes ads seriously anymore? Verizon Wireless tells me they have the “most reliable network,” Sprint Nextel has the “most powerful network,” and Cingular has the “fewest dropped calls.” Why believe any of these slogans if they’re all claiming basically the same thing?
I have to agree with my colleague and arch-nemesis Dan Meyer, managing editor of RCR, who wrote recently that carriers should just settle their advertising disputes in a cage fight to the death. I fully applaud this suggestion, and would like to buy some front-row seats.
I mean, pretty much every company in wireless claims they’re the “leading provider” of whatever they sell. Shouldn’t someone be the “barely staying afloat” provider? Or maybe the “almost bankrupt” provider?
So my point is that advertising claims are just that-claims. No normal person believes them, or even gives them a second thought. Thus, thankfully, we can all be the “leading provider” of whatever crap we’re selling.
