Lab Grown Rulings are a Qualified Success

Last week's ruling against two retailers who omitted the words "lab grown" from their online diamond ads shouldn't have surprised anyone.

But it did. It surprised both the retailers who had been found to have broken advertising rules, and in very different ways.

One, Hong Kong-based Linjer, was surprised because it said it had no idea its ads were in breach.

The other, Australia-based Novita Diamonds, was surprised because it claimed consumers have no expectation that "diamond", without a qualifier, means only a natural diamond.

This isn't the first time action has been taken over ads that blur or ignore that distinction, and it won't be the last.

But the two very different reactions, from two different retailers, are quite revealing.

The Natural Diamond Council, together with the London Diamond Bourse, complained that both retailers had misled consumers by implying that they were selling natural rather than lab grown diamonds.

The UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) upheld those complaints and said the ads had breached its Committee of Advertising Practice code, which covers all non-broadcast ads.

It told both retailers not to "misleadingly use the term 'diamond' to describe their synthetic diamonds in isolation without a clear and prominent qualifier, such as 'synthetic' or wording of the same meaning".

The ASA gave each retailer a right to reply. Linjer said it "did not realise that their ads breached the Code". 

Funny that, given that legislation in Hong Kong, where the company is based, insists on a qualifier - such as artificial, man-made or synthetic - to describe any diamond that is not a natural mineral.

The fact that the same rules apply in the UK should not have been a big surprise.

There was a very different reaction from Novita Diamonds. It put up a spirited defense, insisting that the average consumer no longer understood the word "diamond" to indicate a mined gem and that as a consequence, its ads were not misleading.

"The assumption that 'diamond', without qualification, automatically meant mined diamond was not supported by contemporary standards, gemmological authorities, or established industry usage," it argued.

Novita Diamonds said it clearly branded itself as 100% lab grown company (its website is headlined: "Australia's Largest Lab Grown Diamond Jewellery Specialist").

It also said it never suggested the diamonds were mined or natural. Its ads make no reference to geology, rarity, or heritage and instead focused on fast delivery and ready-to-ship engagement rings.

None of that was ever going to impact the ruling of the watchdog, which essentially asks one question only: "Does the ad clearly and explicitly identify a lab grown diamond as a lab grown diamond?"

But zoom out for a moment from the binary, legal issue to the broader issue, and Novita's assertion has some substance.

The average consumer no longer understands 'diamond' without a qualifier, to necessarily mean a natural diamond, it says.

Regardless of any advertising rules, the word, in ordinary conversation, has lost - or is losing - the direct connection it once had with a shiny piece of carbon that was dug out if the ground.

The proportion of lab growns sold is likely to grow, year on year, and the perceived connection between a diamond and the billion-year story will weaken year-on year.

That's not to say watchdogs and governments will rule that a lab grown diamond still needs a qualifier.

The vast majority of pearls (around 95%) today are cultured, but still need to be labelled as such.

The same thing may well happen with diamonds. The rules will demand a qualifier, but many customers won't care.

Have a fabulous weekend.