Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited - JIO DIGITAL LIFE

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS)

The CCC-R panel reviewed the advertiser’s claim of operating the “World’s biggest data network”, which was initially found to be inadequately substantiated, as the supporting data from Tefficient excluded several major U.S. telecom operators. The CCC-R panel noted that in their submission for review, the advertiser has provided additional data and analysis from an independent global consulting firm. This new data included estimates suggesting that the advertiser’s data traffic is higher than the total mobile data traffic of countries such as the USA. Upon evaluation, it was observed that the estimated data figures for the USA appeared lower than expected. However, a comparison of mobile data traffic at the level of individual telecom operators in the USA showed that each had significantly lower volumes than the advertiser. This analysis supports the conclusion that no single telecom operator globally exceeds the advertiser in total mobile data usage. The CCC-R panel further observed that the advertisement is targeted at general consumers, who typically associate data usage with mobile consumption. The CCC-R panel noted that the term `data traffic’ can cover various types, including trunk traffic, consumer-level usage, terrestrial traffic, and mobile delivered traffic. In this context, the advertiser’s claim was viewed as broad and not clearly limited to mobile data, which could lead to a wider interpretation. In response, the advertiser clarified that the analysis supporting the claim is primarily based on human consumption of data and specifically excludes machine-to-machine traffic, which was not considered in the assessment. The CCC-R panel recommended that clarifying that the claim is based on mobile data usage/mobile data traffic would provide clarity and avoid confusion among consumers. The CCC-R panel concluded that though the voice-over claim, "World’s biggest data network", was substantiated, the year and the source for the claim are not mentioned in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapter I, Clause 1.2 of the ASCI Code (“Where advertising claims are expressly stated to be based on or supported by independent research or assessment, the source and date of this should be indicated in the advertisement.”). The earlier decision of the complaint being Upheld stands on Review.