清晰度最高IDD0060

Complaint concerning PCCW-HKTC's Promotional Claimof "清晰度最高 IDD 0060"(in English translation: "IDD 0060 of the Highest Clarity")Complaint against:PCCW-HKT Telephone Limited ("PCCW-HKTC") Issue:The complainants complained that PCCW-HKTC'spromotional claim "清晰度最高IDD 0060" (inEnglish translation: "IDD 0060 of the Highest Clarity")is without proper and accurate substantiation.Relevant Instruments:Section 7M of the Telecommunications Ordinance and/orthe Advertising Code of Practice issued by theTelecommunications Authority in January 1996 (the“Advertising Code”)Case Opened:January 2002Case Closed:April 2002Decision:No breach of section 7M of the TelecommunicationsOrdinance or the Advertising CodeOutcome:Case ClosedCase Reference:T10/021.The Telecommunications Authority ("TA") received complaints from IDD service providers concerning the advertisements of PCCW-HKTC containing the promotional claim "清晰度最高IDD 0060" (in English translation: "IDD 0060 of the Highest Clarity").2.The advertisements concerned indicates that the claim is based on a performance test which was conducted by the Department of Electronic and Information Engineering of Hong Kong Polytechnic University (the "University") in October 2001 regarding international call voice quality of 6 major Hong Kong IDD service providers (the "Test").3.One of the complainant suggests that the claim of "清晰度最高"(in English translation: "the highest clarity") of IDD 0060 service is dubious, particularly if the test is financed by PCCW-HKTC. The complainant stated that "clarity" is subjective as there are different understandings and interpretation on the word among industry. The complainant also stated that "clarity" might lead the reader to correlatethe idea of the quality of service among different IDD service providers, however, up to the present, there was still no industry recognised test method in relation to the measurement of IDD quality of service and "clarity" in a scientific and objective manner.4.One of the complainants stated that when it attempted to secure a copy of the said study from the University, the University made it clear that the report was commissioned by PCCW-HKTC and it was not a publicly accessible document. It, therefore, has no chance to look at the report in order to understand objectively how the comparison was made.5.The complainants are concerned that without proper and accurate substantiation, the advertisements would have easily misled the general public to believe that other operators had failed to deliver quality products to the consumers or the other operators' products/networks were simply not up to standards. The complainants are therefore concerned that the advertisements are unfair and misleading.6.Section 7M of the Telecommunications Ordinance requires that:"A licensee shall not engage in conduct which, in the opinion of the Authority is misleading or deceptive in providing or acquiring telecommunications networks, systems, installations, customer equipment of services including (but not limited to) promoting, marketing or advertising the network, system, installations, customer equipment or service."The Advertising Code of Practice issued by the TA in January 1996 (the "Advertising Code") requires, among other things, that:!Advertising should be clean, honest and truthful;!Advertisements should be capable of substantiation. The purpose is to prove any claims made in advertisements. While the substantiation needs not be unequivocal, it is good practice to indicate the source of research or authority on which the claim is based.!The use of superlatives should be avoided unless substantiated by facts. PCCW-HKTC was requested to provide the TA a copy of the full report of the Test to substantiate its claim and make representations.7.In the course of the investigation, the TA received another complaint about another claim of "接駁最穩定IDD0060" (in English translation: "IDD 0060of the most stable connection") in the same series of advertisements. The TA notes that this claim also refers to the Test. The TA therefore looked at this complaint together with the present case.8.In its response to the TA's request, PCCW-HKTC provided a copy ofa report of the Test titled:A Final Report Submitted to Pacific Century CyberWorks on theComparison of Line Quality Among Different Long Distance Providersby Dr. Charles SuryaDepartment of Electronic and Information EngineeringThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHong Kong22 October 20019.In its representations, PCCW-HKTC acknowledged that the Test had been conducted at the request of PCCW-HKTC and the report of the Test had not been made available to the public. However, PCCW-HKTC stated that the Test had been conducted in an absolutely independent and impartial way and PCCW-HKTC had never intervened in the conduct of the Test or sought to influence the results of the Test. PCCW-HKTC stated that the design, conduction and reporting of the Test had been at full discretion of Department of Electronic and Information Engineering of Hong Kong Polytechnic University.10.The TA notes from the report provided by PCCW-HKTC that the Test included technical tests conducted on a series of attributes. However, the TA could not locate in the report explicit statements stating that PCCW-HKTC's 0060 service is "清晰度最高" (in English translation: "of the Highest Clarity") and/or "接駁最穩定" (in English translation: "of the most stable connection"). The TA was concerned whether or not the claims were deductions of the result of the Test by PCCW-HKTC rather than by the organisation who conducted the Test.11.In responding to the TA's concern, PCCW-HKTC further provided a copy of letter from Dr. Charles Surya. In his letter, Dr. Surya has set out the findings of the Test, by referring to the report, on the aspects of voice clarity and stable connection. Dr. Surya has also explained, based on the results of the Test, why he considers that PCCW-HKTC can claim that 0060 is of the highest clarity and most stable connection.12.On the information available from the report of the Test and the confirmation and explanation from Dr. Surya, the TA is satisfied that the claims "清晰度最高IDD 0060" (in English translation: "IDD 0060 of the Highest Clarity") and"接駁最穩定IDD0060" (in English translation: "IDD 0060 of the most stable connection") are substantiated by the Test and are therefore not in breach of section 7M of the Telecommunications Ordinance nor the Advertising Code. On this basis, the case is closed.。