Skeptical Susan says: In your story about cosmetics that really work, you mentioned all those products that don’t really do what they say. That made me wonder why don’t any of these companies ever get in trouble if they’re lying? I thought we had laws against false advertising.
The Right Brain retorts:
You’re correct, there are laws against false advertising. They vary from county to country but generally speaking for those laws to take effect someone has to initiate a challenge against the suspicious advertiser. That challenge can come from a consumer such as yourself, another company, or from an interested party such as a consumer group or governmental body.
Two ways to challenge
Regardless of who initiates the challenge, in the US there are two basic ways by which advertisements are “policed.” The first way involves taking the company directly to court because you believe you can show their advertisement is false and misleading. If the courts rule in the plaintiff’s favor, the offending company can be forced to stop specific advertising and they may have to pull recall product from distribution. In addition, the court can levy fines against the company if warranted. This is not usually the course that is followed because of the time and money involved in engaging the legal system.
Most of the time, cases are reviewed by an arbitrating body, specifically the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Better Business Bureau. The NAD has no specific legal authority and can not punish companies for running bad ads, but their opinion carries a lot of weight. So if the NAD rules against a company, in most cases, the advertiser follows their advice (or they may face more severe action in court.) While the general public may not realize it, companies are challenged on their claims ALL the time. In fact here’s a recent example from the NAD case files issued April 2008:
Is Actifade illegal?
This case involves a product called Actifade, a sunspot/age spot fade cream. We’ve blogged before about similar products like Meladerm and other skin lighteners. These are Over The Counter (OTC) drugs because they contain active ingredients that reduce skin pigmentation. The NAD took issue with the advertiser’s claims because product performance claims should follow the language in the OTC drug monograph. Here’s how the NAD ruled on specific Actifade claims:
- Claims regarding “stopping sun spots, age spots and liver spots” implied that the product permanently eliminated skin discolorations and are not supported by any data from the advertiser. Claims about looking “5, 10, even 20 years younger” are also not supported. Both claims should be discontinued
- The claims “Younger looking skin has never been easier” and “Just rub it on and it works,” must be modified to avoid implying that the products immediately remove age spots
- The claim “Actifade combines a cosmetic with powerful medication that will fade sun spots, age spots and dark discoloration with no greasy mess” is acceptable and can be used.
The Beauty Brains Bottom Line
As a result of this NAD challenge, Actifade has agreed to change their advertising. If they had not agreed, they could have been taken to court to face more serious action. So there you have it - that’s how the system protects us from false advertising.
What do YOU think? Does the legal system do a good job of protecting the public from fraudulent cosmetic claims? Leave a comment and share your thoughts with the rest of the Beauty Brains community.
Loading ...
jeni - savvy skin Says:
I think cosmetic companies horribly mislead the public, and they seem to be able to get away with it. Almost every skin care product on the market exaggerates claims, and promises results that are not possible. Freeze 24-7, which promises “instant gratification” and an instant reduction of wrinkles in 10 minutes is just one of a million expamples of companies that lie, and con people. I don’t consider myself stupid, but it took me several years, and lots of money, before I realized most products don’t do what they claim to do.
Josh Darville Says:
Resaults may very. I think this legalistic society we live in is very sad. Personally it’s upsetting to here about and see so many lawsuits. Most people fear the IRS more then death, and getting sued is right up there with the IRS.
I can 100% understand suing if the product is dangerous, or harmful to a persons body. BUT, I’m not as beautiful as the commercial said I’d be… Yea, that’s called photo shop. The person that was wearing this.. they weren’t either.
Truth in advertising.
Pam Says:
I appreciate this post! It inspired me to do a little research. I learned from Wikipedia about the Advertising Standards Authority, a British independent “self-regulatory organization.” I looked this up because I remembered that last year they had challenged L’Oreal after a consumer complained about the fact that L’Oreal’s advertising for Telescopic mascara, featuring Penelope Cruz, was misleading because she was wearing false eyelashes. I recall that a blogger at the time commented that in fact, EVERY bit of mascara advertising done by every company uses false eyelashes.
Janis Says:
Part of me feels that the lawsuits are silly because most women have bene using mascara since they were in high school and know precisely what the little tube of black gunk is capable of and what it isn’t. OTOH, we’re talking about a multi-billion dollar industry, and that should be regulated; I feel the government doesn’t take lying advertisers seriously bceause it’s “only” cosmetics and “only” cheats women and girls out of their money, so they don’t care.
But then I remind myself that I don’t know a single woman who doesn’t instantly assume that pictures of models and actresses have been manipulated almost beyond belief. I’ve seen pictures of actresses that have had so many blur filters run on their skin that they look like they are made out of plastic. It’s gotten flat-out creepy lately.
Tonya Says:
Boy, I agree with Janis. There are some advertisments where the lady’s face in the commercial looks like it was made of wax or plastic.
On the point of “truth in advertising” I think companies that out right lie deserve the fines and judgements against them. However, we all know that any advertising stretches the truth. We’ve all been taught, or at least learned the hard way, “buyer beware”. It’s always good to do a little research before buying most any item.
becca Says:
Those of us who read the site may know full well that everything must be taken with a grain of salt (and a trip to the internet), but there are millions of people who do not know that! There are many people who don’t realize that photos of famous people are altered, and question why they themselves cannot look like that. In fact, on a makeup message board, people frequently ask “how can I get this look” — and the answer is “photoshop.” But still the person doesn’t believe it and wants a product to do that.
Those sort of people are the ones who fall prey to the false advertising (we just get annoyed). If there were more lawsuit-less rulings like the NAD’s, at least people might become more aware of the inaccuracy of cosmetic claims — and a few people will save their money. And NV Perricone would go out of business LOL.
Zhariel Says:
I really feel like the legal system doesn’t do enough to punish fraudulent advertising. As far as being reported to the BBB, that’s kind of a joke. Most people don’t even refer to them before making a purchase.
Most people don’t know that ads are anything but truthful, because I think a lot of people just assume if they’re saying it, it must be true. While many of us know better and try to research such claims, it would be easier for everyone if there had to be more truth to advertising.
Left Brain Says:
I’m inclined to think that it is our education system that is failing us. There are too many laws already. It’s also much too difficult to determine what is truth and what is a lie.
If we could create a more skeptical population, advertisers would automatically start being more truthful. They rely on the fact that most people are gullible.
Janis Says:
I don’t want to get political, but I think it’s education and some other things as well. It’s easy for young girls especially I think to be suckered in by products that promise them that they can change themselves when they’re already taught that they aren’t good enough. Smarts help, but even smart people can be fooled when they want to be. It’s not wanting to run from reality that makes you willing to accept it.
It’s a shame. Cosmetics can be all about playing aroudn and having fun, but they’re taken so seriously.
Study shows 93% of cosmetic products tell the truth. Which ones are lying? | The Beauty Brains Says:
[...] We recently blogged about how the legal system protects us from fraudulent cosmetic claims. Using the example of Actifade skin lightener, we explained how the NAD helps keep false advertising under control. (What? You don’t know about the NAD? Then you’d better check out our previous post!) [...]