gaf 4427530 deceptive advertising final
DESCRIPTION
Ethics in advertising to most would sound like the definition for irony. And according to different sources as defined, there can be nothing ethical about anything that contains the word deceptive in it. So what exactly is Deceptive Advertising? It is advertising that makes a false claim or misleading statement, as well as advertising that creates a false impression. In other words, it is an act of deliberately misleading the consumers about a product, service or a company by offering a false or misrepresentation of information or data in their advertising or other promotional materials. Deceptive advertisement also known as false advertisement is a type of fraud that is considered a serious offense in many countries of the world. Companies use this dishonest trickery to get you to buy their product or service through info-commercials, television ads, billboards or with famous celebrities endorsing their productsTRANSCRIPT
Deceptive Advertising
Ethics in advertising to most would sound like the definition for irony. And according to
different sources as defined, there can be nothing ethical about anything that contains the
word deceptive in it. So what exactly is Deceptive Advertising? It is advertising that makes a
false claim or misleading statement, as well as advertising that creates a false impression. In
other words, it is an act of deliberately misleading the consumers about a product, service or a
company by offering a false or misrepresentation of information or data in their advertising or
other promotional materials. Deceptive advertisement also known as false advertisement is a
type of fraud that is considered a serious offense in many countries of the world. Companies
use this dishonest trickery to get you to buy their product or service through info-commercials,
television ads, billboards or with famous celebrities endorsing their products.
This all began back in the 50’s when airtime was sold to advertisers for a Vitamix
blender. Then in 1984 Herbalife aired the first infomercial on USA Network. Almost thirty years
later, spray on hair, grills named after famous athletes, food products, exercise equipment,
beauty products and on and on are part of a national conversation if not actually in American
homes. Yet the majority of people have come to believe “truth in advertising” doesn’t exist in
this day and age so most quickly jump to the conclusion that all advertising is false advertising.
But what about the people who do believe? How about the ones who get swindled out of their
money or believe that the products or services they are getting will make them healthier, more
beautiful or handsome, skinnier, more attractive, successful or rich? These are the two major
issues with deceptive advertisements. Retailers (clothing and footwear), the Auto Sales
industry, the pharmaceutical companies, and Food Distributors to name a few all need to sell
their products or services and they are willing to do whatever it takes to make the sale. And
how do they reach the consumer? Through advertising of course! The question is; are they
advertising what the consumer gets, often times it is not!
We are saturated by commercials on television, online in newspapers and magazines.
Companies make their products look as good as possible and involve the use of puffery and
weasel words. Puffing is the use of opinions and exaggerated statements. The word “better”,
“best”, “greatest” and “finest” are typically used in these puffery advertisements. The
information is not intended to be factual. You have heard such things as “Coke, It’s the real
thing.” or “The best part of waking up is Folgers in your cup”, “Subway, eat fresh.” A weasel
word is used in advertising to make a claim look legitimate to the casual listener or reader. But
if you look at it more closely it too proves to be empty and meaningless. Like when they say a
medication “helps control acne” it does not actually claim to stop or cure the acne. So “help”
and “control” are weasels. Commonly used weasel words include: “help”, “acts”, “works”, “can
be”, “up to”, “as much as”, “refreshes”, “comforts”, “fights”, “the feel of”, “looks like”, “tastes
like”, and “strengthened”. But puffing and weasel words are generally not considered deceptive
in the eyes of the law. Sellers are allowed some leeway in describing their products and such
statements are typically considered innocent misrepresentations.
So, how is it that they can get on TV or any other type of media and tell you it’s the best
or show you something that when you go in looks nothing like what you saw yet the consumer
buys it and continues to settle for less? Because they make us think we need the product that
this time this product will do the trick and they lure us in with words or pictures thus filling our
need through deception. As consumers in a world of constant advertising messages being
flashed before our eyes, we have unfortunately become a society that is very susceptible to
fraud or misleading marketing. Is it right? Most certainly not! But in a market economy,
businesses are encouraged to compete in pursuit of their own self interests; making a profit.
But what happens when these companies strategically and unfairly compete to sell their
products to us, the consumers, and opt for this unethical practice of deceit? In the long run,
these companies will suffer. This is because when people start discovering the company’s
tactics and that the products or services are not what they advertised, the consumer begins to
distrust and fewer people will buy from them.
Retailers are most guilty of deceptive advertising techniques by systematically
advertising their merchandise at low prices to get customers into their stores and then often
times they fail to have the merchandise or they offer you a buy one get one free promotion
when in reality it is simply at the regular price for a short time and then it goes back to a
discounted price, in the end you get two for the same price regardless.
Deceptive practices can take on many forms such as false promises, unsubstantiated
claims, incomplete descriptions, false testimonials or comparisons, small print qualifications of
advertisements, partial disclosure, or visual distortion of products. And some of the deceptive
methods that are finding their way to consumers are through; Hidden fees, surcharges and
disclaimers, “Going out of Business” sales, Misuse of the word “free”, Manipulation of units
and standards, Fillers and oversized packaging, Manipulation of terms, Bait & switch,
Inconsistent comparison, misleading illustrations, false coloring and guarantee without a
remedy specified. For a better awareness of these deceptive methods you must understand
what they are and how they work:
Hidden fees, surcharges & disclaimers, in one method that service providers use to
strategically nail on the fees and surcharges that are not disclosed to the consumers in
the advertised price. One of the most common is for activation of services such as
mobile phones, but is also becoming frequently in broadband, telephony, gym
memberships, and air travel. In most of the cases, the fees as well as the disclaimers are
hidden in small print and elaborate terminology and language that they are essentially
unidentified
"Going out of business" sales. In many cases, liquidator companies are hired to sell
merchandise from a closing store and their tactic is to raise the prices on items that
were already marked-down on clearance. For items already marked down, this means
the liquidator increases the price and then "discounts" it from there. Also common is for
the sale prices at a retail chain's other stores to be lower than the liquidator's prices at
the closing stores.
Misuse of the word "free", by definition "free" means "devoid of cost or obligation".
However, retailers often use this word for something which is included in the overall
price. For example, "buy one, get one free" sales. The second item is absolutely not
"free" under the normal definition, since, to get it, the consumer has to pay the full price
of the first item.
Manipulation of measurement units and standards. Manufacturers and sellers may
manipulate standards of a product to totally mean something different than their widely
understood meaning. For example, Fretter Appliance stores claimed "I’ll give you five
pounds of coffee if I can’t beat your best deal". While initially they gave away that
quantity, they later redefined them as "Fretter pounds", which, unsurprisingly, were
much lighter than standard pounds.
Fillers and oversized packaging. It is unfortunate to say but there are products that are
sold with fillers, which increase the legal weight of the product with something that
costs the producer very little compared to what the consumer thinks that he or she is
buying. The most common example is in the Food industry, where meat is injected with
broth or even brine (up to 15%) to make it heavier. Another example is TV dinners, they
are filled with gravy or other sauces instead of meat.
Manipulation of terms. Many of the advertisers terms have some meaning, but the
specific extent is not legally defined, leading to their abuse. A frequent example is
"organic" food. "Light" food is also even a more common manipulation term used. The
term has been variously used to mean low in calories, sugars, carbohydrates, salt,
texture, thickness, or even light in color. Labels such as "All-Natural" are frequently used
but are essentially meaningless. Tobacco companies, for many years, used terms like
"low tar", "light", "ultra-light", "mild" or "natural" in order to imply that products with
such labels had less detrimental effects on health, but in recent years it was proved that
those terms were considered misleading.
Incomplete comparison. "Better" means one product is superior than another in some
way, while "best" means it is superior to all others. However, advertisers are failing to
list the way in each they are being compared (price, size, quality, etc.) and, in the case of
"better", to what they are comparing it to (a competitor's product, an earlier version of
their own product, or nothing at all). Therefore, without defining how they are using the
terms "better" or "best", the terms become meaningless.
Misleading illustrations. A perfect example of this is advertised images of hamburgers,
which may show the items to be larger and juicier than they really are. The images in
the advertisement also show the ingredient from the side of the hamburger, while in
actuality they would be much less visible in the actual product. Products that are sold
unassembled or unfinished may also have a picture of the finished product, without a
corresponding picture of what the customer is actually buying.
False coloring is used to make people think food is riper, fresher, or healthier than it
really is. Food coloring can be a big form of deception. When combined with added
sugar or corn syrup, bright colors give the subconscious impression of healthy, ripe fruit,
full of antioxidants and photochemical. One variation is packaging which obscures the
true color of the foods. For example, red mesh bags containing yellow oranges or
grapefruit, which then appear to be a ripe orange or red.
Guarantee without a remedy specified - If a company does not say what they will do if
the product fails to meet expectations, then they are free to do very little. This is due to
a legal technicality that states that a contract cannot be enforced unless it provides a
basis not only for determining a breach but also for giving a remedy in the event of a
breach.
"No risk" -Advertisers frequently claim there is no risk to trying their product, when
clearly there is. For example, they may charge your credit card for the product, offering
a full refund if not satisfied. However, the risks of such an offer are numerous
Acceptance by default -This refers to a contract or agreement where no response is
interpreted as a positive response in favor of the business. An example of this is a
subscription automatically renews unless the customer explicitly requests it to stop. This
is even conducted when the customer may have specified a specific length of
subscription up front, that is then exceeded and renewed without notification to the
customer.
Undisclosed dishonest business practices - for example in 2011, several banks, including
Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, TD Bank and Citizens Financial Group paid hundreds
of millions in settlements over the practice. This is because customers’ transactions
include both deposits and withdrawals; the banks were sequencing the transactions so
that the withdrawals were processed before the deposits, creating an overdraft in the
customers’ accounts.
All these methods are a very sad reality of deceptive advertising but, in today’s society
advertisers are being held more and more accountable for the messages they produce. As well
as the manufacturers, who are held responsible for their products meeting the standards set
forth by the advertisement. Most companies also cover themselves by taking out a creative
license when marketing or advertising their product. An example is Burger King. They advertise
the Whopper and it looks amazing. Then you put it up against the real thing, side by side and
it’s not so amazing, it’s actually a sad comparison.
Is this false advertisement, creative license or is it OK? If you think about it, would the
consumer really want to see the pathetic burger and would it make them still want to go get
one? Probably not and as a matter of fact, any advertising that leads the consumer to make a
purchase based on false assumptions about the price and quality of competitive product is
considered deceptive practice and is punishable by law. And how many people will actually
take the time or the money to present these claims?
The responsibility of enforcing the laws dealing with unfair and deceptive advertising
comes under the jurisdiction of the FTC federal trade commission. But in order to establish that
an advertisement is false five things must be proven;
1.) A false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser’s own or another person’s
goods, services or commercial activity.
2.) The statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of
it’s targeted audience.
3.) The deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of it’s audience.
4.) The advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce.
5.) The deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury.
The injury is usually money the consumer lost through a purchase that otherwise would
not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. Yet the majority of people
never take it that far unless it’s serious and how difficult would it be to prove all five of these
proof requirements and would it be worth the consumers’ time or money? That is where the
federal trade commission comes into play as the governing authority against unfair and
deceptive acts or practices in commerce. Advertisers are held accountable for the messages
they produce, so too, are the manufacturers whom are held accountable for their products
meeting the standards set forth by advertisements. Once and advertised product is called out
for not living up to expectation, it tarnishes their brand image. The added fear of a lawsuit
pertaining to deceptive advertising along with penal laws which prohibit such dishonest
practices makes for an industry centered on truthful intent. Yet deceptive advertising is done
every day and they get away with it because it is assumed that most reasonable consumers
know a seller will exaggerate a bit. Look at the Axe commercials promising men that if you use
their product it “will” attract women. And too some degree yes that could be true “if” the
woman likes the scent but not because of anything in particular the product has to lure women.
They even go as far as having a graphic silhouette on some of their products depicting a man
with women surrounding him, not to mention how their ads portray women but that’s another
report all together. The one thing companies cannot do is advertise for example, that a product
will “cure cancer because there are no medical finds or proof that there is a cure for cancer. At
that point that is an obvious deception punishable by the law. Usually ads for reputable
companies almost never lie. The cost of being caught is simply too high. It can take years to
reverse such damage. Also to some degree the people inside the companies want to be able to
look at themselves in the mirror. Believe it or not business people do not belong to some weird
species that we are not familiar with and we will be them in a short time.
There have been many false advertising scandals that have cost brands millions of
dollars. Subway was one of those companies in the news lately that may be headed to court.
The infamous Subway foot-long sandwiches were coming up short. The controversy began
when a very precise customer ordered a foot-long and then pulled out a measuring tape to
measure the accuracy of the so called “foot-long” sub. He found that it was actually 11 inches
so he took his outrage to Facebook, where he posted a picture of the product, requested
answers from the company and demanded free subway for the rest of his life. He expected the
company to comply with his request otherwise he would sue them for False Advertisement. The
photo he posted on the social network immediately sparked an abundance of photos being
posted from other Facebook users where subs were being measured and coming up short, that
is less than 12 inches, which is what “foot-long” should measure; 12 inches is in a foot…
elementary school math. Franchise owners of Subways expressed to the media that the chain
had cut the portions of their cold cut meats by 25% and raised the cost of the food to each
individual store owner. Nevertheless, Subway attributes the discrepancy of the sub lengths to
the fact that each of the 38,000 stores freshly bake their own bread and because of this they
are unable to make sure each bread would come out of the oven measuring a perfect 12 inches.
They do say, however, that they are looking into this matter. As of right now, no legal actions
taken against this company have been reported. But unlike this situation, others have found
themselves facing the consequences for crossing the line. Volvo was also one of those
companies. At one of those monster truck rallies, the giant trucks squashed all the cars except
for a Volvo. Volvo’s ad agency had the bright idea that this idea would make for a great
commercial. But in order to make the ad, the film company had to shoot several takes. So they
reinforced the beams inside the car to withstand repeated hits by the monster truck. When the
press heard about this Volvo was exposed and the ad agency was fired and went out of
business. Was it worth the deceptive advertisement to lose everything? And in reality, Volvo
would stand up to one squashing by a monster truck. And, although the demonstration was
exaggerated, it did show truth. So it’s fair to say, major brands have had to pay up, facing
scrutiny from competitors. It’s fair to say, however, that most of the time these false
advertisement charges are brought on by the competitors. But in the case of Subway it is the
consumers that are tired and fighting back and with the social media making it easier every day
to reach so many people at once they can’t be stopped. And thanks to the internet the most
influential voices in advertising are the voices of the consumers.
So what can companies do to continue getting the advantage they are getting without
doing the unethical act of deceptive advertising? The truth is, ethics is personal. What you may
perceive as ethical someone else may not. True ethics requires more than being fair, honest
decent and using correct action. It requires owning up to the responsibility. If they can earn the
trust of consumers it would create brand loyalty and customers will keep coming back to a
company they can trust. They owe it to the consumer to be honest about what they are getting,
especially if the items or services could harm the consumers.
It is recommended that for a company to be more ethical they should not put down or
underestimate their competitor’s same products, they should not mislead the consumer by
providing false information, they should not hide the products side effects, and they should not
be ethically immoral. It takes a brave advertiser to go against what our culture is distorting and
present the truth. One such company that deserves commendation is Dove. Dove is succeeding
in challenging the conventional ideas of beauty that advertising help to create. They portray
real woman and convey the message that each woman has her own unique beauty.
In conclusion dishonest or deceptive ads hurt both consumers and
businesses. Most of us have been victims of false advertising at some point. Consumers are
cheated and businesses lose sales. For these reasons, both government and industry have taken
steps to make sure that advertising becomes more truthful and accurate. Regulations and
negative incentives are the primary tools used to discourage deceptive ads in the marketplace.
But there are limits to the effectiveness of these tools. There is no guarantee that all ads are
honest and true. The question is, will companies change their marketing policies or continue to
prioritize profits over the consumer’s right to know and welfare? For this reason, consumers
must be constantly on guard and keep a watchful eye out for what is being claimed by the
sellers in the marketplace. After all, it is better to be safe than sorry. The bottom line is
unethical ads have a bad effect on a company’s image as well as on the whole advertising
agency. Retailers, Auto makers, pharmaceutical company’s, food distributor’s and all
companies in general are responsible for being transparent and eliminate consumer confusion
thus must clearly practice truth and honesty in advertising.