Diotima and Co challenges Ethica Diamonds over ‘misleading’ ad

Diotima and Co Limited was recently advised by Law firm Gunnercooke on a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) regarding “misleading” advertising of diamonds.

The challenge was made by the company against Kinetique Limited which trades as Ethica Diamonds, on the grounds that its diamonds were made of substitute materials and therefore an advertisement for ‘diamonds’ was misleading to consumers.

The complaint referred to The National Association of Jewellers’ ‘Diamond Terminology Guideline’.

The claim has been upheld by the ASA with a new ruling stating that the ad has breached “multiple codes” and that future advertising must ensure that the term diamond is accompanied by an “identifier” to make clear the nature of the product.

The company based in Cornwall, specialised in diamond alternative technologies and laboratory grown diamonds and precious gems.

The ASA ruling considered that consumers would be “unlikely” to be aware of the range of diamond alternatives that were available and that it was in their judgement, it was “necessary” that ads for diamond alternatives provide “clear qualification as to the nature of the product in order to avoid misleading consumers as to the composition of the product”.

They said: “We further considered that, where the product was a laboratory-grown diamond such as the Diamond Foundry product, the term ‘diamond’ was misleading unless an appropriate identifier, such as ‘laboratory-grown diamond’, or ‘synthetic diamond’ was used.

“Because that was not the case, we concluded that the ad was misleading.”

Avila Foreman, director, Diotima and Co Limited, added: “We are thrilled with the decision from the ASA, which is a significant step forward for the diamond industry in ensuring there is clarity for consumers with regards to authentic, natural diamonds versus the synthetic diamond alternatives that we are seeing come to market.”

Source link

We will be happy to hear your thoughts

Leave a reply