A Tesco advert for a new supermarket in the UK town of Manningtree has been banned by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) following a complaint.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
The advert claimed the store would bring environmental and socio-economic benefits and encouraged residents to write or email to the retailer with their thoughts.
The complainant challenged a claim from Tesco that “there is a need and demand for a new food store to serve the Manningtree / Lawford / Mistley area” because he believed most respondents to a survey by Tesco said it was not needed.
The complainant also argued whether the expenditure in the store would actually be re-invested in the area and questioned the retailer’s claim that the store would create “over 200 full-time and part-time local jobs”, as he understood the number was actually 100.
Tesco responded by saying that the need and demand for a new food store in Manningtree was assessed according to a number of factors including the existing shopping habits of residents in the Essex town; anticipated future shopping habits; the availability of existing facilities; growth in the area’s population and associated expenditure.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataThe retailer also said expenditure should be drawn back to the local area from out of town, in accordance with UK government policy, which promoted self-sufficient or sustainable local communities. It also claimed that, based on its size, the store would create around 200 jobs.
However, the advertising watchdog upheld the complaint and said Tesco had failed to substantiate that there was a need and demand for a new food store to serve the area and concluded that the claim was misleading.
The ASA did, however, conclude that the claim for the creation of 200 jobs was acceptable and did not consider that the circular implied Tesco would re-invest money spent in the store in the local area, as the complainant believed. The ASA concluded that the claim was acceptable.
Despite this, the watchdog said Tesco had breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (substantiation), 7.1 (truthfulness) and 49.1 (environmental claims) and that the circular must not appear again in its current form.
