REA and Domain in split Federal Court decision over misleading ads as judge calls most just ‘puffery’
A Federal Court battle between REA Group and Fairfax’s Domain over a series of ads promoting the Domain app has seen a judge rule some were misleading while others were merely “advertising puffery”.
REA had launched the action alleging the series of ads last year by its real estate rival claiming it was variously Australia’s “#1 property app”, “Australia’s highest rated property app”, and had more listings in the Sydney and Melbourne market, was false and misleading.
In what amounted to a split decision, both sides are claiming victory.
In a lengthy decision running to 61 pages, Justice Bernard Murphy looked at the REA’s claims about the ads, included concerns about how Domain had used apple and Google Play consumer ratings in its ads, and whether people understood the nature of the ads.
The action probably was a good idea, wild claims are par for the course in politics, but advertising should strive for better.
I know I am old, but the judge’s so called “puffery” has not been common in the trade in my experience, there has always been a dark feeling about the golden superlative, and a natural tendency to steer clear of Number one, Best, World’s Leading etc. without sound proof to back it up.
I must say also that I have always been scathing about the word lengthy, as in [quote] “in a lengthy decision running to 61 pages.”[unquote] 61 pages is a long decision, as surely as 3 pages is a short one. My old school master used to say “If lengthy, why not strengthy?”
Google Play Store:
Domain 4.2 stars
REA: 3.4 stars
(The Domain app batters REA into touch, imho.)