Let's consider *just* the image title. We'll ignore the overall experience.
A "reduction of 1.74%" . That's a quantitative and definitive statement that creates a clear impression and expectations.
Consider RG234. 37:
"An advertisement should not contain an open-ended promise about a benefit if it is likely that circumstances will change so that the promise will become misleading. It is important to remember that an advertisement may create a lasting impression in consumers' minds. If circumstances change, merely withdrawing the advertisement may not alter the fact that certain expectations have been created, and the advertisement may have an effect that is misleading."
Further:
RG 234.47
"The more that a qualification is required to balance the information contained in the headline claim, the more prominently placed the qualification should be. The headline claim must not itself be misleading."
RG 234.51
"If a qualification is required, it must be published at the same time as the original message. Subsequent qualifying disclosures will not be effective as the misleading impression will already have been created."
The promises made in their 'quiz' also falls the 'promise' test.
Re their out-of-date rates, they have a 10-day window to update to current rates. A small comment disclaimer isn't enough... and they should know better. Relying on old data is simply unacceptable.
We expect more from Joust. Of all the leadgen finspammers, these guys seem to have some talent in their ranks.
Non-compliance is commonplace, so most ads ignore these basic principles, particularly those from the leadgen crowd.
