IndieJewel Fashions Private Limited - Heer by GIVA

Recommendation: Not Upheld | Medium: Industry Member

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the advertisement. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and replied requesting for an extension of two weeks to submit their response. The deadlines stipulated by Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) procedure exist keeping in mind the immediate and widespread impact that advertisements have on the public. Consequently, any action which is needed to be taken with respect to the same is required to be prompt and urgent. It is for this purpose that the deadlines, as stipulated, are set for advertisers/broadcasters etc, and the CCC itself makes it a priority to deal with every complaint before it as expeditiously as possible. However, as a special gesture, the advertiser was granted an extension of additional three business days to respond. The advertiser in their response stated that on the first objection regarding obituary style visuals and phrases like demise of natural diamonds and troubled legacy, the advertisement is not defamatory, and that the ASCI Code permits obvious untruths or exaggerations. No specific competitor is targeted. Regarding the second objection on “damage she leaves on the planet”, the advertiser denied that the advertisement creates a misleading perception that the entire natural diamond industry is irresponsible and harmful to the planet. On the objection relating to the phrase “responsible choice”, the advertiser denies implying ethical or environmental superiority and denies any misleading link between sustainability and zero percent making charges. In support of their response, the advertiser submitted website links to articles on the slowdown of the mined diamond industry, a research report on the environmental impacts of mined diamonds, and additional references on ethical, and market trends relating to lab grown diamonds. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, considered the complaint, and the advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that similar complaints were received against the same advertisement. The CCC observed that the advertisement used an obituary style visual and phrases such as “demise of Smt. Mined diamonds”, “troubled legacy”, as part of a creative concept to highlight lab grown diamonds. The CCC felt this presentation is an obvious exaggeration meant to catch attention, rather than a literal statement about the natural diamond industry, and noted that the advertisement does not single out any specific company or brand. The visual and the wordings are not defamatory or comparative in nature. The CCC further observed that the claim, “damage she leaves on the planet”, is part of a creative approach to present lab grown diamonds as an alternative. It does not imply that the natural diamond industry is harmful to the environment. The advertiser submitted material referring to general environmental aspects of mining. Since the advertisement does not make any specific environmental statement, the claim is not considered misleading. The CCC also noted that the advertisement does not label lab grown diamonds as a “responsible choice” in a way that implies superiority over natural diamonds. It clarifies that the advertiser’s product carries no making charges, which is not linked to sustainability claims, and no environmental comparisons are made with mined diamonds. The claim is therefore not misleading and does not amount to greenwashing or unfairly disparaging natural diamonds. Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the said claim/objection, “Obituary Style Visual, Words & Phrases used such as “Demise of Natural Diamonds" & “Troubled Legacy”, “……Damage She Leaves on the Planet”, and “Responsible Choice”, are not in contravention of Chapters I and IV of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD