https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/10/youtube-tv-which-costs-73-a-month-agrees-to-end-600-less-than-cable-ads/ Skip to main content * Biz & IT * Tech * Science * Policy * Cars * Gaming & Culture * Store * Forums Subscribe [ ] Close Navigate * Store * Subscribe * Videos * Features * Reviews * RSS Feeds * Mobile Site * About Ars * Staff Directory * Contact Us * Advertise with Ars * Reprints Filter by topic * Biz & IT * Tech * Science * Policy * Cars * Gaming & Culture * Store * Forums Settings Front page layout Grid List Site theme light dark Sign in Truthiness in advertising -- YouTube TV, which costs $73 a month, agrees to end "$600 less than cable" ads Google to "modify or cease" ads after industry review board rejects appeal. Jon Brodkin - Oct 11, 2023 7:05 pm UTC Screenshot of a YouTube TV ad that claims the service costs $600 less than cable. Enlarge / The disputed YouTube TV ad. Google reader comments 69 with Google has agreed to stop advertising YouTube TV as "$600 less than cable" after losing an appeal of a previous ruling that went against the company. Google said it will "modify or cease the disputed advertising claim." The case was handled in the advertising industry's self-regulatory system, not in a court of law. The National Advertising Review Board (NARB) announced today that it rejected Google's appeal and recommended that the company discontinue the YouTube TV claim. YouTube TV launched in 2017 for $35 a month, but the base package is $72.99 after the latest price hike in March 2023. Google's "$600 less than cable" claim was challenged by Charter, which uses the brand name Spectrum and is the second-biggest cable company after Comcast. The National Advertising Division (NAD) previously ruled in Charter's favor but Google appealed the decision to the NARB in August. "Charter contended the $600 figure was inaccurate, arguing that its Spectrum TV Select service in Los Angeles only cost around $219 a year more than Google's YouTube TV service," according to a MediaPost article in August. A Google ad claimed that YouTube TV provided $600 in "annual average savings" compared to cable as of January 2023. A disclosure on the ad said the price was for "new users only" and that the $600 annual savings was "based on a study by SmithGeiger of the published cost of comparable standalone cable in the top 50 Nielsen DMAs, including all fees, taxes, promotion pricing, DVR box rental and service fees, and a 2nd cable box." Advertisement Disclosures "not clear and conspicuous" Agreeing with the NAD decision, an NARB panel found that the price comparison provided by Google did not justify the "$600 less" claim. The panel "determined that the commercial disclosures were not clear and conspicuous" and "concluded that at least one reasonable interpretation of the challenged claim is that YouTube TV is $600 less than any comparable service available from companies traditionally associated with cable services." The NARB also said that Google's "comparison does not align with the challenged claim" for the following reasons: + Many households can subscribe to basic Spectrum service without renting cable boxes, therefore Google failed to justify the cost of two set-top boxes in its price comparison, and + In certain markets, cable providers offer regional sports networks (RSNs) but YouTube does not, therefore Google did not have a valid reason for adding the cost of Spectrum's Sports View option to the price comparison. The NARB announcement quotes Google's response in which it agreed to stop making the advertising claim. Google said it "disagrees with NARB's determination that people watching the challenged commercials will somehow understand 'cable' to mean something other than traditional cable television," but "intends to modify or cease the disputed advertising claim." Google also said that at a later date, it "may reconsider the claim based on updated information." When contacted by Ars today, Google said it had no further comment. Disclosure: The Advance/Newhouse Partnership, which owns 12.4 percent of Charter, is part of Advance Publications, which also owns Ars Technica parent Conde Nast. reader comments 69 with Jon Brodkin Jon has been a reporter for Ars Technica since 2011 and covers a wide array of telecom and tech policy topics. Jon graduated from Boston University with a degree in journalism and has been a full-time journalist for over 20 years. Advertisement Channel Ars Technica - Previous story Next story - Related Stories Today on Ars * Store * Subscribe * About Us * RSS Feeds * View Mobile Site * Contact Us * Staff * Advertise with us * Reprints Newsletter Signup Join the Ars Orbital Transmission mailing list to get weekly updates delivered to your inbox. Sign me up - CNMN Collection WIRED Media Group (c) 2023 Conde Nast. All rights reserved. Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (updated 1/1/20) and Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement (updated 1/1 /20) and Ars Technica Addendum (effective 8/21/2018). Ars may earn compensation on sales from links on this site. Read our affiliate link policy. Your California Privacy Rights | [privacyopt] Do Not Sell My Personal Information The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Conde Nast. Ad Choices