Advertising watchdog partially upholds 5G advertisement claiming wireless tech is harmful
Tuesday, 13 August 2019
An advertisement that claimed 5G technology was harmful to people and animals' health has been removed following a decision from the Advertising Standards Authority.
The flyer distributed in a Wellington suburb by advocacy group 5G Free New Zealand claimed that radiation emitted by 5G and wireless technologies could 'increase cancer risk, alter brain development and damage sperm' and posed a threat to wildlife.
It also claimed that 'over 200 scientists and physicians worldwide who have researched the biological and health effects of radio-frequency radiation have signed the 5G appeal, calling for a moratorium on the use of 5G technology'.
The complainant said the statements in the advertisement were false and misleading.
**READ MORE:
* This year is all about 5G: Here's what you need to know
* Huawei sends mixed messages over quitting NZ
* 5G will fry your brain? I don't think so**
5G Free NZ, whose tagline is 'don't let them fry your brain', defended the advertisement saying all its claims were based on published science and actions taken by scientists.
But the authority's complaints board upheld the complaint in part because four of the six claims the complainant had issues with were not sufficiently proven.
According to the Advertising Standards Authority codes of practice, advertisements must be truthful, balance and not misleading and advocacy advertising must clearly state the identity and position of the advertiser.
The board agreed the advertisement's message was a warning about 5G wireless technology because it could be harmful to human health and the environment, and that a significant number of scientists were concerned about it.
While the board found it was clear the flyer was advocacy advertising, the identity of the advertiser, 5G Free NZ could have been made clearer.
The board said that any claims made about about potential harm that could result from the use of new technology needed to be 'adequately substantiated'.
On the claim that more than 200 scientists and physicians worldwide had researched the biological health effects of radio-frequency radiation, the board found the advertiser had provided sufficient evidence of this.
The board also did not uphold the complaint about the line 'wireless radiation consumes mega amounts more energy than do wired options of communication'.
The board found the complainant was not disputing whether wireless radiation consumes more energy than wired options of communication, rather that the advertiser was suggesting its opposition was 'to mobile phones per se, not just to 5G'.
The board said it was up the advertiser's choice on how it wanted to present its arguments and that statement was not misleading.'
However, the board did find that 5G Free NZ's the four other claims were unsubstantiated - 'radiation from small cells is not small', 'wireless antennas emit microwaves - non-ionising radiofrequency radiation – and essentially function as cell towers', '5G poses a threat to our wildlife' and 'independent science shows the type of radiation emitted by 5G and wireless technologies is capable of harming our health'.
As a result the advertisement was pulled and upheld in part.