That Annoying First Rule of Advertising
"Always Tell the Truth"

By Jon Lee Andersen

As a part of my practice I monitor advertising activities in the marketplace, including claims being made, claims being disputed, government activities and lawsuits involving consumers and companies. Most often, the activities are related to a real (or in court cases), an alleged, breach of that old First Rule: Always Tell the Truth. Here are a couple of recent incidents worth comment.

Over the Line; Chutzpah to the Max!!

In a recent reported matter before the Nation Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus was an objection to some press releases released by the company, PrintsMadeEasy, Inc. Among other things, the press releases announced that the Business Cards Association of America had given its "annual" award for "Top Business Card Provider" to PrintsMadeEasy.com. The award was issued by a "blue ribbon panel" that ranks business card providers on their service. The release then went on in some detail about the reasons PrintsMadeEasy.com was selected for the award (as well as a few disparaging remarks about competitor VistaPrint).

As you have probably already guessed, there is no "Business Cards Association of America"! There was absolutely no truth to the claim that any award was issued by such an association, let alone an "annual" award, nor was there a "blue ribbon panel" which ranked business card providers on their service. Squirming in the face of the enormous falsehoods, PrintsMadeEasy tried to duck by saying that the press releases were really not advertising and furthermore, they (PrintsMadeEasy) did not control the content of the press releases which were prepared and distributed by an outside public relations firm.

Needless to say, NAD wasn't buying any of that bit of guff and determined that the press release was nothing short of a paid commercial message by the advertiser. No joke! Advertising practices such as this should be hammered, and hammered hard. Here both the company and the PR firm were completely dishonest and deserve any suffering that may have resulted from this activity.

Lesson: Obvious

Dancing Close to the Line

Probably no business is more competitive than food. From white tablecloth restaurants to supermarkets to farmer's markets, the variety of offerings is mind boggling. So, making a product stand out is no easy task. In the recent past, the move on the part of the large consumer packaged food marketers, the thrust of the pitch seems to have been to involve health benefits. For a while, the products seemed to focus on their "lack" of bad ingredients, i.e. no fat, low sodium, reduced sugar, etc. If we eat the advertised product, we will reduce our risk of the adverse health effect associated with the product in an unaltered state. And the advertising followed suit, with headline claims on how to lower your cholesterol by simply using the advertised product and, oh by the way, also following a low fat diet. And so it went. Now, the trend has shifted from what is removed from the product to what has been added for our benefit. It is a world of additives, the "vitamin enriched" products, such as orange juice and even water. And vitamins everyone thought they understood. There is even a chart on most products detailing your daily recommended vitamin level, and the % of that level a serving of the product delivers. Then Dannon struck gold with its Activia yogurt. And a new advertising theme was created, "biotics." Probiotics! Prebiotics! And the theme now is how these ingredients, work with your body's natural systems (digestive, immune, etc.) to provide health benefits greater than ever. Of course, advertising, spreading the word on these new ingredients and the health benefits jumps in with both feet, citing clinical studies, test results, statistics and other supportive "scientific" evidence. Many of the claims border on the claims made for products that most reasonable consumers know are not true, the "lose 30 pounds in two weeks with X-Loss" sort of thing. But these are "big-league" companies. So the question is real benefits or just marketing hype? How do we tell?

Ah, a California (where else) law firm is seeking to have a jury tell us. Representing a female named Patricia Wiener (and seeking to have the case expanded to a class action, mostly because there is not much $ to be made in one plaintiff), a lawsuit has been filed against Dannon alleging that Ms Weiner has been damaged because of the deceptive advertising for its DanActive, which duped her into buying the product. The law firm takes great issue with Dannon's claims of "clinically proven" results.

Lesson: Is your claims substantiation evidence court-worthy?

On a lighter note:

In ads it's OK to blow
To put your best stuff out to show
But whatever you name it
If you're going to claim it
Be sure that it's true and not faux

© September 2008 Jon Lee Andersen All Rights Reserved