The Stage

Shawshank Redemption producers investigated over misleading poster

Published Tuesday 1 December 2009 at 15:10 by Lalayn Baluch

Producers of West End show The Shawshank Redemption are under investigation from trading standards officers at Westminster City Council, after it emerged that a critic’s quote being used to promote the show was actually referring to the original film.

A poster for the play, which is currently running at the Wyndham’s Theatre, said Daily Telegraph reviewer Charles Spencer had described the production as a “superbly gripping, genuinely uplifting drama”.

It later emerged that Spencer had been referring to the 1994 Academy Award-nominated film starring Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman. In his review for the paper, the critic had in fact said the stage show was inferior to the film “in almost every respect”.

Sue Jones, operations manager for Westminster council’s trading standards office, said: “It is not acceptable for any theatre to mislead the public and we investigate all complaints.

“Nobody has filed any complaints in this instance, but now we are aware of the issue, we will be contacting the theatre concerned and ask for an explanation of the wording. If we are not satisfied with their response we will take further action.”

In 2008 a European Union directive was incorporated into UK law under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, which made it unlawful to sell someone goods that they would not have otherwise bought by using advertising with “misleading omissions”. As revealed by The Stage the previous year, this included publicity material for theatrical shows.

A spokesman for The Shawshank Redemption - which just a few weeks ago announced it was to close three months earlier than scheduled - declined to comment.

Neil Adleman, partner at media and entertainment law firm Harbottle and Lewis, said the prospect of prosecution by Westminster City Council’s trading standards was “a wake up call to the West End” and should not be ignored. He explained trading standards had an obligation to enforce the regulations regardless of whether a complaint had been received.

“The law is clear that if a producer has not been diligent in ensuring that their advertising material is not misleading and if an average member of the public could be misled then action should be taken. Westminster trading standards will have to form a view as to whether a producer has knowingly or recklessly breached these requirements,” he said.

“What is not optional for trading standards officers is whether to enforce the legislation. I think in this instance they may ask the producers for some very good arguments as to why they allowed what would seem to be an evident misrepresentation. The issue is not whether or not anyone actually complained to the producers. The issue is whether their action was likely to be misleading.”