a weasel word is a modifier that practically negates the claim the follows commonly used weasel...
TRANSCRIPT
Types of Advertising Claims
The Weasel Claim A weasel word is a modifier that
practically negates the claim the follows
Commonly used weasel words include:Helps Acts Up to Comforts
Like Works As much as Tackles
Virtually Can be Refreshes Fights
The feel of Looks like Fortified Enriched
The Weasel Claim
EXAMPLES
Helps control dandruff symptoms with regular use.
Leaves dishes virtually spotless.
Listerine fights bad breath.
The Unfinished Claim
The unfinished claim is one in which the ad claims the product is better or has more of something, but does not finish the comparison
EXAMPLES Magnavox give you more. Fort LTD – 700% quieter
The “We’re Different and Unique” Claim
States that there is nothing else quite like the product being advertised.
EXAMPLES There’s no other mascara like it. If it doesn’t say Goodyear, it can’t be
polygas.
The “Water is Wet” Claim
These claims say something about the product that is true for any brand in that product category.
The claim is usually a statement of fact, but not a real advantage over the competition.
EXAMPLES Mobil: The Detergent Gasoline Great Lash greatly increases the diameter
of the lash.
The “So What” Claim
Kind of claim to which the careful reader will react by saying, “so what?”
Claim made is true, but give no real advantage to the product.
Similar to “Water is Wet” claim, but is not shared by most other brands in the same product category.
EXAMPLES Secret is strong enough for a man, but made for a
woman. Campbell’s gives you tasty pieces of chicken and
not one, but two chicken stocks.
The “So What” Claim
Kind of claim to which the careful reader will react by saying, “so what?”
Claim made is true, but give no real advantage to the product.
Similar to “Water is Wet” claim, but is not shared by most other brands in the same product category.
EXAMPLES Secret is strong enough for a man, but made for a
woman. Campbell’s gives you tasty pieces of chicken and
not one, but two chicken stocks.
The Vague Claim
The vague claim is simply not clear. Uses words that are colorful but meaningless. Uses subjective and emotional opinions that
defy verification. Most include weasels.
EXAMPLES Lips have never looked so luscious. Fleishman's makes sensible eating delicious.
The Endorsement or Testimonial
A celebrity or authority appears in an ad to lend his/her stellar qualities to the product.
Person sometimes claims to use the product.
EXAMPLES “I just had so much build up and so many clogged
pores that once I started using Proactiv Solution, my face was just shining.”
-Jessica Simpson
Hanes “It’s gotta be the tag” campaign with Michael Jordan
The Rhetorical Question
Demands a response from the audience Question is asked and the viewer or
listener is supposed to answer in such a way as to affirm the product’s goodness.
EXAMPLES Shouldn’t your family be drinking
Haiwaiin Punch? Plymouth – isn’t that the kind of car
America wants?
Why Use Ad Claims?
A market economy is an economy in which decisions regarding investment, production and distribution are based on supply and demand, and prices of goods and services are determined in a free price system
› VS. government in a controlled system
Creates competition in pursuit of self-interest = PROFIT
To create the illusion of superiority, look as good as possible, better than the competition
Why Use Ad Claims?
Purchases are made to wants, needs, and desires
Advertising plays an important role in INFLUENCING customers’ decisions.
A well-designed advertising campaign has dramatic effects, but ground rules apply
Regulation in Advertising
Federal Trade CommissionGovernmental agency that regulates unfair and deceptive practices on a case-by-case basis and occasionally with industry-wide regulations.
Has the power to require that advertisers prove their claims› “Tests prove” or “physicians recommend”
Deceptive Advertising
DeceptionForm of trickery involving the selling of goods or services to consumers
Weasel words are not considered deceptive in the eyes of the law
Innocent MisrepresentationsAssumed that most “reasonable consumers” will know a seller with exaggerate
Deceptive Advertising
Advertising is considered deceptive if:
Representation, omission, or practice that is likely to cause a substantial segment of potential customers to have a false belief about the advertiser’s or competitor’s product
Someone has been or is likely to be injured as a result of the deception.
› Can also be a business that has lots sales by a lessening of goodwill, reputation, etc.
Examples
Factually Wrong› Medicine› Cure a disease› Must have specific proof
True, but deceptive› Bread› Half as many calories as competition› Each slice of bread is half as thick as
competition
Activia Yogurt
Dannon's popular Activia brand yogurt lured consumers into paying more for its purported nutritional benefits -- when it was actually pretty much the same as every other kind of yogurt.
Falsely touting the "clinically" and "scientifically" proven nutritional benefits of the product, Dannon even got a famous spokesperson, Jamie Lee Curtis, for the supposed digestion-regulator. But after a while, some customers didn't buy it.
A class action settlement last year forced Dannon to pay up to $45 million in damages to the consumers that filed the lawsuit and others who said they'd been bamboozled. The company also had to limit its health claims on its products strictly to factual ones.
Source: ABC News
Taco Bell
When consumers raised questions about what was actually seasoning Taco Bell's seasoned beef, the company didn't know how to respond.
It was simply using oat filler -- which means the meat isn't seasoned beef at all, according to USDA standards. The franchise had been tricking its consumers into thinking its products were of a higher grade than they actually were.
Taco Bell took the opportunity to poke fun at itself, hoping to mitigate the PR disaster. The company even took out a full-page newspaper ad thanking complainants for suing. So far, so good. Taco Bell's proactivity and willingness to address the controversy have restored some faith in the fast food giant.
The woman who started all the hullabaloo ultimately dismissed her lawsuit.
Source: Ad Age
Olay Definity
In 2009, an Olay ad for its Definity eye cream showed former model Twiggy looking wrinkle-free -- and a whole lot younger than her years (she turns 62 next week). Turns out the ads were retouched.
British lawmakers yanked digitally altered spots, citing not only a gross misrepresentation of products, but the ad's potentially negative impact on people's body images.
Source: Business Insider
Rice Krispies
Kellogg's popular Rice Krispies cereal had a crisis in 2010 when it was accused of misleading consumers about its immunity boosting properties. The Federal Trade Commission ordered Kellogg to halt all advertising that claimed that the cereal improved a child's immunity with "25 percent Daily Value of Antioxidants and Nutrients -- Vitamins A, B, C and E," stating the the claims were "dubious."
Just a year prior, the company settled with the FTC over charges that its Frosted Mini-Wheats cereal didn't live up to its ads. The campaign claimed that the cereal improved kids' attentiveness by nearly 20%, and was shot down when the FTC found out that the clinical studies showed that only 1-in-9 kids had that kind of improvement -- and half the kids weren't affected at all.
Source: CNN
Splenda
The Sugar Association says Splenda's "Made from Sugar" slogan is misleading, and that the sweetner is nothing more than "highly processed chemical compound made in a factory," reports CBS.
In 2008, the association first filed a suit against Johnson & Johnson subsidiary McNeil Nutritionals, which then countersued the association engaging in a "malicious smear campaign." The two parties reached a confidential settlement before going to trial.
Equal also took its rival to court in 2007, accusing "the makers of Splenda of confusing consumers into thinking its product was healthier and more natural than other artificial sweeteners." The two parties also reached a confidential settlement.
Source: Business Insider
Airborne
Herbal supplement Airborne was a national hit throughout the 1990s. Marketing of the product claimed that it helped ward off harmful bacteria and germs, preventing everyday ailments like the flu and common cold. But did Airborne actually have these benefits?
Apparently not, which sparked a huge false advertising scandal. There were no studies to support Airborne's effectiveness that met scientific standards -- so the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) got involved.
The high-profile scandal ended with a huge settlement, with Airborne having to pay $23.3 million in the class-action lawsuit, and an additional $7 million settlement later. The exact benefits to users of Airborne remain unestablished.
Source: NPR