News ASA bans Samsung LED TV ads

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/09/03/asa-bans-samsung-led-tv-ads/1

The Advertising Standards Authority has branded adverts for LED-backlit TVs from Samsung "misleading," and has banned the ads from running again.

 

I wish they would stop those dreadful BT Internet ad's. We give you 20mb connection so its not slow in peak times? WTF, that has nothing to do with it BT! Unbeatable wireless connection, so what its using WEP and doesn't improve your internet speed.

 

I wandered into an Apple reseller the other day and asked if their "LED cinema displays" were actually a three-to-five-year technological leap ahead of the competition, or whether by "LED" they actually meant "LCD", which is - oh, what's the word - ah, yes that'd be a lie. Samsung aren't the only ones.

 

I think there is worse problems in advertisements than this, take a look at the sick government ones for example.

 

QFT This...

 

I'd like to know it was an LED LCD TV, assuming it's claims of better quality are true.

The worst advertising LIE is of course the broadband speed claims.

 

LED TV sounds good to me, lets me differentiate between which LCD's use LED backlight or not, sounds very clear to me LED TV
now, when there is an amazing TV on the market or produces its picture useing millions of LED's, then ASA would have a foot to stand on
but I can undestand the point, simply lable them LED LCD Screens
BT! Unbeatable wireless connection? I've not seen those adds though I don't see how BT can "beat" Virgins 50MB Broadband+Wireless N router combo, BT suck

 

Virgin should still be shot for advertising "unlimited" broadband; it should be labelled as "severely throttled if you want to use anything above an arbitrary limit".

Fair play, I get the full advertised speed on my cable connection, but I only get it for an hour before I'm throttled to 25% speed.

 

but then you have the edge-lit LED backlit LCD TVs which are no different from CCFL backlit LCD TVs, and the locally-dimmed LED backlit LCD TVs which are much more expensive but actually provide some advantages (even though it's only a poor pretender to plasma's throne )

That's the problem. LEDs are being used in two very distinct ways by manufacturers, and it's unfair to not distinguish between the two.

 

Well it worked on me. I though they were LED rather than LCD.
Thankfully I'm in no position to buy one anyway.
There are still other reasons to buy these though, the thinness and weight for a start..........

 

This is just stupid. The claim that "the phrase "LED TV" "was not adopted consistently throughout the industry"" is completely false. The only other manufacturer that I've seen advertising the same technology (LG) uses the exact same term to describe their TV. Now, if there are only two TV manufacturers advertising the same technology and they both use the same term, that pretty well means that the phrase was adopted consistently.

This belief that government needs to protect Average Joe Consumer from making uninformed choices because he can't do some basic research is absurd and should be insulting to anyone with half a brain.

 

Basic research would show that LED would be expected to be better than LCD. All Samsung had to do was say "LED backlit TV" and a lot less people would have been confused. That way we'd have known it was still LCD. I had a look at their website and I didn't see LCD mentioned anywhere on the "LED TV" pages. There are plenty of people out there who want to buy a TV who aren't technologically aware, nor should you expect everyone to be.

 

Good stuff from the ASA because there are plenty of people out there who need protecting from clever 'marketing BS' claims.

 

+1

 

If you presume they aren't technologically aware how would saying 'LED backlit TV' help. I wouldn't have thought they even realised the TV was backlit or what that meant.

LED LCD TV would make more sense, although it's a bit of a mouthful. Personally I didnt see an issue with it. They are definately a different kind of TV when you see them in the flesh, so why not distinguish them differently.

 

I'm not sure exactly what advantages it's supposed to offer anyway. Let's examine this:

How, exactly? Sharpness is determined, assuming a "perfect" input signal, by the locations of the TFT's pixels and the accuracy with which they're driven. Notwithstanding a few dead pixels on large displays, TFTs are capable of resolving exactly the amount of detail represented by their pixel dimensions, give or take nyquist. The backlight technology is completely irrelevant. Even if real OLED displays become available, there's no reason to suspect they'd be sharper. Brighter, less power hungry and with much better contrast ratio, sure, but not sharper.

Again, how? There is technology that allows local dimming of the backlight, but I'm fairly sure that most of the devices currently being promoted as "LED TVs" are not using that approach. The black level of the display is, again, determined by the TFT panel - the efficiency of its polariser and the correctness of the drive electronics.

Once again, how? The backlight plus the intrinsic characteristics of the display should combine to produce the advertised white point with reasonable CRI. If some other technology isn't doing that, then it's simply wrong. From a purely technical perspective, white LEDs actually have an extremely strange spectral output which is somewhat less good than the average cold-cathode fluorescent lamp (and RGB triplets are even worse).

Why is the practice of using LEDs to backlight TFT panels is actually any sort of technological advancement?

 

I think this is the sticking point -

LED TVs are the big ones you see in city centres comprised of, you guessed it, lots of LEDs. LED backlit TVs are not LED TVs.

 

We need an agency like this in the US. Microsoft would file the first complaint, about the Mac ads.

 

Apple have been in trouble multiple times over here for misleading ads (specifically the iphone). I'm not sure if MS have actually complained yet, though.

 

Well they did respond after a year or so with their own parody ad campaign