Broadcast advertising accuracy rules must extend to the internet: Bird Lovegod

The invention drew attention of investors, who were rebuffed, and also drew the unwanted attention of air conditioning manufacturers, who offered a fortune for the patent, again declined, at which point the determined and morally righteous student was expelled from the college, and went on to make this wonderful invention available for the masses.

The videos showed a clip from a supposed consumer product ratings website, all glowing with five star reviews. I was half tempted to buy one, and got as far as Googling the company, and digging a little deeper.

Turns out, according to some buyers, the actual product is little more than a damp squib.

The actual reviews on real consumer websites were scathing, and one claimed all the so called positive reviews on the video and website were in fact models and actors. What to believe? Who to believe? Where is the truth?

Generally speaking, with regards to online adverts, it seems there’s no requirement for factual honesty, no necessity for truth.

Perhaps I’m one of those people who consider truth to be literally sacred, and when falsehood is presented as truth I find it highly objectionable.

Maybe I just take things too literally, maybe I’m not savvy and can’t tell snake oil from age rejuvenation creams. But really, truth does matter.

And if it doesn’t then nothing does, and anything goes, and reality doesn’t exist. Which is what Big Tech seems to consider a great solution to the ills of humanity.

I wonder how many young people have the same attitude to truth these days. I wonder if any of them care about truth, or have an expectation of it.

Or have they been brought up online, by unreal influencers, and fake news, and fake adverts, and fake accounts, and fake everything, that they either don’t see it, or they do see it and don’t care, because it’s just the way things are.

In 2022, when launching a consultation on this topic, the Government admitted that while in TV and radio broadcasts advertising licences can be revoked for serious breaches, “there are no equivalent sanctions for those that host harmful content online”. A taskforce was subsequently set up but no laws have changed.

If I were able to write legislation I would require that online adverts have the same standards applied to them as other media. And the online platforms would be liable accordingly. Totally reasonable and fair.

But this is unlikely to happen, so what we inevitably have is a digital media landscape where truth is irrelevant. Truth isn’t measured as a metric, truth has no value, no purpose. This is blasphemous, and morally and ethically bankrupt.

As the internet platforms creep and seep into the mainstream and in many places replace it, it seems to me it’s about time the mainstream rules were applied to online advertising. It’s strange, a legacy feature of the internet's openness, that the ‘normal’ rules of truth and decency and accuracy simply do not apply. Advertisers can post almost anything, and no one cares if it’s true or not, real or not, and that’s just the way it is.

There are huge consequences of creating societies where truth is not present.