While the vast majority of Canadians (86%) say they derive value from advertising, they are also “smart and healthy” skeptics who apply considerable scrutiny to the commercial messages they encounter.
Those are some of the findings in Advertising Standards Canada’s 2014 Consumer Perspectives on Advertising Report, which attempts to shed light on how Canadians perceive the ads they encounter on a daily basis.
The findings are based on an online survey of 1,275 Canadians conducted by The Gandalf Group in September. The results are considered accurate to within plus or minus three percentage points 19 times out of 20.
The study found Canadians were more likely to express positive opinions about advertising on three key metrics: favourability, acceptability and value to consumers.
Francophones are more likely to say they feel favourably about the ads they encounter, with the report theorizing it is because they are exposed to more Canadian-created ads than Anglophones.
Only 14% of respondents said they get “no value at all” from advertising, while parents, women and people 35-54 were more likely to say advertising is helpful in the decision-making process.
Perceptions of advertising also varied considerably by category. While 81% of respondents said they felt comfortable with the levels of truth and accuracy in restaurant advertising, that number plunged to 19% for ads for political parties and candidates.
Only 30% of respondents said they felt comfortable with the levels of truth and accuracy in ads for natural health products, while 33% said they were comfortable with ads for cell phone, cable TV and internet services, and car dealerships.
Ads in newspapers are the most trusted, with 66% of respondents saying they feel most comfortable with the levels of truth and accuracy, while only 10% of respondents said they trusted online pop-up ads.
Nearly half of Canadians (42%) said they have recently been exposed to an ad they found “unacceptable,” with men, Francophones, parents, new Canadians and people aged 35-54 more likely to report exposure.
The top reason for an ad being deemed “unacceptable” was for a misleading or unrealistic depiction of an advertised product or service (24%), while a sexist portrayal was the second most cited reason (21%), followed by sexually explicit content (15%). At the other end of the spectrum, 1% of respondents deemed an ad unacceptable because of poor grammar.
Ads deemed “sexist” were more likely to be for clothing (24%), or household products and home furnishings (19%). Those who felt advertisements inaccurately portrayed products or services were more likely to cite vehicles (21%), government or political parties (20%) or health and wellness products (18%).
The ASC report said this is one of many instances of political advertising “dragging down” Canadians’ perceptions of the industry.
Sixty five per cent of respondents said they have stopped purchasing a product or service because they deemed its advertising unacceptable, up from 58% in 2011.
The study also found there is some confusion around advertising resembling editorial content, with slightly more than 50% of respondents indicating they have read, seen or heard something described as “sponsored content,” a “special features section” or “advertorial content.” However, 10% of respondents said they were unsure if they have ever read, seen or heard anything described this way.
Anglophones were more likely to Francophones to say they had seen the use of such terms, as were people under 35.
