Welcome to The Ad Watchers! Join National Advertising Division attorneys on this podcast as they explore advertising claims and what it means to put them to the truthfulness test.
Any sort of advertising claims related to health or wellness have a special place within advertising claims substantiation: all advertising claims need a reasonable basis, but when it comes to health claims, that reasonable basis has to be competent and reliable scientific evidence, or CARSE. This means that the results of any study done should reflect how the product will work in practice. Tune in to the final episode of Ad Watchers Season One to hear hosts Hal Hodes and La Toya Sutton break down what this evidence should really look like in practice.
For more information about this episode, read the show notes here.
In the increasingly digital landscape, the influence of word-of-mouth has gone viral. Before making a purchase, consumers frequently turn to a product or service’s reviews and ratings. Since consumers trust what other consumers have to say, brands want to leverage these voices—but are they responsible for them? In this episode, Hal and La Toya explore endorsements and testimonials, as well as the broader category of the implementation of user-generated content in advertising. Listen in to learn about the lines between user-generated content versus testimonials versus endorsements.
For more information about this episode, read the show notes here.
When you hear a claim in an advertisement like, “best in the world,” you probably know that the product has not been measurably proven to actually be the best in the world. And that’s okay, because this is an example of puffery, an exaggerated, blustering, or boastful statement or general claim that could only be understood to be an expression of opinion, not a statement of fact. But where is the line between puffery and a claim that needs a reasonable basis? In this episode of Ad Watchers, hosts Hal Hodes and La Toya Sutton break down the questions they ask to determine whether or not a statement is puffery. Later in the episode, they are joined by their colleague Eric Unis to judge the Battle Royale of Puffery: each host presents cases that illustrate various types of this practice. Tune in to hear which of our hosts has the best examples of puffery in the universe!
For more information about this episode, read the show notes here.
When you see an advertisement, you are likely taking in much more than just the words you are presented with. The visuals, sounds, and way the language is presented can all impact the implied messages that consumers take away. In general, advertisers are required to have a reasonable basis for all messages conveyed, whether express or implied – that’s the easy part. But figuring out what message(s) are conveyed in their advertising – and therefore what messages need to be substantiated – can be hard.
In this month’s episode of Ad Watchers, Hal and La Toya walk listeners through NAD’s process when deciding what messages are reasonably conveyed by an ad under review. Later in the episode, they are joined by Professor Margaret C. Campbell of UC Riverside to provide a deeper understanding of how consumers take in and understand advertising messages. Listen now!
For more information about this episode, read the show notes here.
While it may seem like a niche issue to some, disclosures are something every advertising lawyer needs to know about. On this episode of Ad Watchers, hosts Hal Hodes and La Toya Sutton break down the ‘Four Ps’ that advertisers must keep in mind when it comes to disclosures: prominence, presentation, placement, and proximity. Tune in to learn more about the ingredients you need for a properly disclosed advertising claim.
For more information about this episode, read the show notes here.
