this is the ppt about the misleading advertisement presented by the compniesy

1. 1
Project report
On
Misleading advertisements
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the degree of
MASTERS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
MBA[FINANCE] semester2nd
[2022-2024]
UNIVERSITY OF FINANCIAL STUDIES
GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY
SUBMITTED TO: DR. JASPAL SIR SUBMITTED BY: NEERAJ
ROLL NO:27642205108

2. 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my deepest appreciation to all those who provided me with this possibility
to complete this report. I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been
possible without the help of many individuals and the organization.
I hereby take the opportunity to express my profound sense of gratitude to all those who have
helped and encouraged me toward successful completion of project report. It has been grate
experience working on the concept of misleading advertisements.
I would like to convey my heartful gratitude to Dr. JASPAL SIR for her tremendous direction
and assistance in the completion of my project.
NEERAJ

3. 3
S.no. Title Page no.
1. Introduction 4-5
2. Fair and Lovely misleading advertisement 6-10
3. Why did HUL Rename Fair & Lovely to Glow & Lovely? 11-12
4. Red bull falls advertisement 13-17
6. HORLICKS ltd./s.ZYDUS 18-20
8. References 20-21
9. Shampoo false advertisement 22-26
13. Prevalent forms of Misleading advertisement 27-30
16. Case study 30
17. Penalties 31
18 Conclusion 32
19 References 33

4. 4
Introduction
Advertisement
Advertising is the best way to communicate to the customers. Advertising helps informs the
customers about the brands available in the market and the variety of products useful to them.
Advertising is for everybody including kids, young and old. It is done using various media types,
with different techniques and methods most suited. The term ‘advertising’ is derived from the
original Latin word ‘advertere’ which means ‘to turn’ the attention. Every piece of advertising
turns the attention of the readers or the listeners or the viewers or the onlookers towards a product
or a service or an idea. Therefore, it can be said that anything that turns the attention to an article
or a service or an idea might be well called as advertising
Misleading Advertisement
False promises: Impossible promises are made through ads. These promises cannot fulfill, because
it is impossible to do.
For example, Food yoga Health the clinic ad has promised to lose 15 Kgs in 3 months without
dieting, no exercise.
Fig 1.
Any advertisement or promotion through Television, Radio, or any other electronic media,
Newspapers, Banners, Posters, Handbills, wall-writing etc. to misrepresent the nature,
characteristics, qualities or geographic origin of goods, services or commercial activities so as to
mislead the consumer could be broadly defined as a misleading advertisement.

5. 5
Spot False Promise
Dishonest advertisers will say just about anything to get you to buy their weight loss products.
Here are some of the false promises you’ll often see in weight loss ads:
• Lose weight without dieting or exercising. (You won’t.)
• You don’t have to watch what you eat to lose weight. (You do.)
• If you use this product, you’ll lose weight permanently. (Wrong.)
• To lose weight, all you have to do is take this pill. (Not true.)
• You can lose 30 pounds in 30 days. (No.)
• This product works for everyone. (It doesn’t.)
• Lose weight with this patch or cream. (You can’t.)

6. 6
Fair and Lovely to drop ‘Fair’ from its name but will that be enough to appeal
to new-age consumers
• In a revolutionary decision, Hindustan Unilever Limited has announced that it will rename
the brand ‘Fair and Lovely.’ The giant said that it will drop words like ‘Fair,’
‘White/Whitening,’ Light/Lightening’ from all its packs and communications.
• This move comes after Fair & Lovely faced a lot of backlashes on social media for building
unrealistic beauty standards and stereotyping skin tones.
• We speak to experts to understand how Fair & Lovely can go about rebranding themselves
to undo the damage and win back consumer trust.
Fig 2.
Over the years, HUL’s Fair & Lovely has created an image for being a skin lightening
cream. While there are many other players in this industry, Fair &
The “Fair and Lovely” case refers to the controversy surrounding the use of the fairness
cream brand “Fair and Lovely” and similar products. The product was marketed as a
solution for skin lightening and claimed to provide benefits such as improved job prospects,
better marriage prospects, and increased social status to those who used it.
Critics argued that these advertisements perpetuated harmful beauty standards and
reinforced the notion that lighter skin was superior to darker skin, leading to a negative
impact on self-esteem and body image. They also pointed out that the use of skin lightening

7. 7
products can be hazardous to health as they contain toxic chemicals that can cause skin
damage and other health problems.
In response to the criticism, the makers of “Fair and Lovely” and other fairness creams faced
calls to reformulate their products and change their advertising strategies. In June 2021,
Unilever, the parent company of “Fair and Lovely”, announced that it would rebrand the
product and change its name, along with discontinuing the use of words like “fair”, “light”,
“whitening”, and “brightening” in its products and packaging.
This case highlights the ongoing discussions about representation and diversity in the beauty
industry, as well as the negative impacts of harmful beauty standards on individuals and
communities.
Lovely has faced a lot of backlash on social media for its poor choice of brand name, advertisements
and for propagating unrealistic beauty standards and stereotyping skin tones.
The statement released on HUL’s website said, “Fair & Lovely has never been, and is not, a skin
bleaching product.”

8. 8
Consumer’s opinion
Shashwat Das, Founder, Almond Branding was appalled by people rejoicing with this move. Das
was not amused with HUL’s tokenism. He expected HUL to follow J&J and drop the products
altogether that stand for colorism in India.
“In my opinion, it’s only an eyewash. I am looking forward to a complete ban on skin-tone
oriented products. The very foundation on which these brands are built is flawed. We have known
it for years and it took 45 years and a raging anti-racial movement to force this move upon certain
companies. How come there is a sudden awakening? This is not a change out of self-realization.
Had these protests not caught momentum, such a move by HUL would have taken a few more
decades to come.
After years of protest against regressive racial stereotyping on the basis of skin colour, FMCG
major Hindustan Unilever said it will remove the word ‘Fair’ from its popular skincare brand
‘Fair and Lovely’, as part of a re-branding exercise.
Fig 3.
HUL dropped the word ‘fair’ from its name but will it be enough to undo the damage? Has
the new Fair & Lovely marketing strategy affected its brand positioning

9. 9
Table of Contents
• The Age-old Obsession with Fair Skin
• The Outcry Against Fair & Lovely marketing strategy
• Why Fair & Lovely Became Glow & Lovely?
• The Rebranding Impact on Fair and Lovely Brand Positioning
• Key Takeaways
• Conclusion
The Age-old Obsession with Fair Skin
Fig4.
In the 21st century, it is inconceivable and unforgivable that we are still struggling with skin color
issues, specifically in India.
The obsession with fair skin starts in the womb. Women are instructed day after day to have food
items like beetroot, saffron milk so that the newborn baby has a milky white complexion.
Further, from the moment a child is born, parents and relatives start talking about the child’s skin
tone, and it goes on. No wonder the fairness creams industry has grown in leaps and bounds over
the years.

10. 10
One of this league’s most prominent and best-selling names is HUL’s Fair & Lovely. The product
reportedly generates $500 million every year from sales only in India. Apart from this, the brand is
also sold in Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, African countries, and other regions across
the globe.
The Outcry Against Fair & Lovely Marketing Strategy
For a country like India obsessed with fair skin tone, Fair and Lovely marketing strategy, its
advertising style, and phraseology have always shown how women with darker skin face challenges
while searching for the right partner or job. But things drastically improve in their lives after they
start applying this fairness cream.
Furthermore, when beauty icons like Aishwarya Rai, Juhi Chawla, Padmini Kolhapur endorse a
particular beauty product, people start believing in its credibility. The outcome is an escalated
growth of Fair & Lovely.
Source
One of the most popular ads of Fair & Lovely was the one that featured Indian actress Genelia
D’Souza. The advertisement showcased that she becomes fair by applying this fairness cream, gains
confidence, and gets selected as a commentator alongside renowned cricketer, Srikant.
In a revolutionary decision taken on June 25, 2020, Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) announced
that it would rename its age-old product Fair and Lovely to Glow & Lovely. The product from the
men’s range was renamed Glow & Handsome.
The globally renowned FMCG giant also removed words like white, whitening, light, and lightning
from its packs, promotional messages, and communications.
The move led to a change in the fair and lovely marketing strategy, mainly because of the USA’s
strong protests against racial discrimination.
It also faced prolonged backlash on social media for stereotyping skin tones in India and portraying
unrealistic beauty standards. Let us look at the reasons behind this move and how it impacted Fair
and Lovely brand positioning.
Why did HUL Rename Fair & Lovely to Glow & Lovely
According to the All-India Women’s Democratic Association (AIDWA), the Fair & Lovely
advertisements were offensive. The portrayal of women in them was demeaning and false. Activists

11. 11
from different associations began objecting to the Fair and Lovely marketing strategy. They began
to speak out against Fair & Lovely, not just in India but on international platforms too. Even the
common public found these absurd.
Multiple online petitions and signature campaigns demanded a ban on the product. A few examples
of such campaigns include:
● In 2016, three students at the University of Texas, Austin, commenced an Instagram campaign
and named it Unfair & Lovely. It was a play on the name of India’s most popular fairness cream.
The #unfairandlovely hashtag welcomed people with darker skin tones to share their stories and
photos.
● In 2009, Chennai-based Kavitha Emmanuel initiated a campaign called Dark is Beautiful. She is
the founder-director of an organization called Women of Worth, which works in the field of women
empowerment. This particular campaign was launched to fight the toxic belief that an individual’s
worth is measured by their complexion.
● Inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement, Chandana Hiran, a 20-year-old woman from
Mumbai, filed a petition on
The Impact of Rebranding on Fair and Lovely Brand Positioning
Owing to the severe and continual backlash faced by HUL, it rebranded its bestselling cream. But
did it influence the brand’s market position?
The answer is an absolute yes. When it comes to Fair and Lovely brand positioning, this move has
proved disastrous for the brand, which is considered the biggest player in the fairness cream
segment. Not only the product sales were affected, but HUL shares suffered critically.
According to market experts, Fair & Lovely’s key proposition has always been fairness. The
message was clear that your complexion could become a few shades lighter by using this product.
However, the same brand now offering ‘glow’ sounds vague. They need a better way to explain the
benefits of the product.
Additionally, if a brand is marketing a product internationally, it requires a clear understanding of
each demographic and geographic standard and requirements. For example, most of the western
population use self-tanning lotions. So, it may feel strange for them to use skin-lightening creams.
Then, in 2014, the Advertising Standards Council of India banned adverts that depict people with
darker skin tones are inferior to those having a fair complexion. But the question remains that it
took a racial uprising on a global level for these brands to understand this.

12. 12
Key Takeaways
• After decades of earning skyrocketing profits, suddenly, FMCG brand HUL declared that it
would remove the words fair or fairness from all its products.
• Our society does not need a fairness cream like Fair & Lovely to reinforce our deep-rooted
fixation with fair skin.
• A product that simply permeates an inferiority complex based on skin tone should not be
available in the market in the first place.
• A product that promotes itself as a cream providing a fair complexion, changing its name
cannot change the way people perceive it.
• We do not have a dark-skinned model advertising for a beauty product. The brands can set
an example by bringing a transformation in this and promoting the message that all shades
are lovely.
Conclusion
After more than 45 years, HUL realized that its Fair & Lovely marketing strategy was not fair.
While many rejoined the brand’s decisions, many pointed out that the brand is simply selling old
wine in a new bottle.

13. 13
Red Bull Will Pay $10 To Customers Disappointed The Drink Didn't Actually
Give Them 'Wings'
"Red Bull gives you wings" has been the energy drink's slogan for nearly two decades. Now the
company has agreed to pay out more than $13 million after settling a US class action lawsuit that
accused the company of false and misleading advertising claims.
Red Bull does not, it turns out, give you wings - even in the figurative sense. Red Bull claims in its
marketing that the drink can improve concentration and reaction speeds, but the plaintiff in the case
said these claims are false and lack scientific support. While the suit did not allege that plaintiffs
were disappointed that they didn't grow actualy wings, it does claim that Red Bull relies a lot on
terms like "wings" and "boost" to give consumers the impression that the drink gives people some
sort of physical lift or enhancement.
If the proposed settlement is passed by the U.S District Court of the Souther District of New York
where the case was brought, Red Bull will be required to pay $6.5 million into a settlement fund
within a week.
The settlement states that Red Bull will reimburse customers disappointed the energy drink hasn't
lived up to their expectations with either a check for $10 or a voucher for $15 worth of Red Bull
products. This could prove costly as the class action suit covers the millions of people who have
bought at least one can of Red Bull over the past 10 years.
The suit was brought about by a number of Red Bull drinkers, one of which claimed he had been
drinking the product since 2002 but had seen no improvement in his athletic performance.
Red Bull settles false advertising
It turns out a can of sugar-laden energy drink may not spontaneously make you sprout wings after
all.
According to court documents filed in New York Federal Court, Europe-based energy drink
company Red Bull has agreed to pay out up to $13 million US in compensation to settle a class-
action suit launched by an upset customer who says the company uses false advertising to promote
its product.

14. 14
"The defendant's prodigious advertising marketing and promotional spending has been used to
mislead customers into believing that Red Bull is a superior product worthy of a premium price and
has the ability to 'give you wings' and provide energy and vitality," reads the complaint brought
forward by New York resident Benjamin Careathers, who has been drinking the product since 2002.
Although it contains many ingredients that the company claims are stimulants, the active
ingredient is caffeine. The company makes those claims despite mounting evidence that its
eponymous product contains no more stimulation than could be found from any other source of
caffeine. A 250-ml can of Red Bull contains about 80 mg of caffeine. That's less than other caffeine
fixes, including coffee, a 207-ml cup of which can contain as much as 150 mg of caffeine.
Fig 5.
A US citizen named Benjamin Carethers questioned – “Why doesn’t RedBull give me
wings?” He sued the company for ‘false advertising. He claimed that after 10 years of drinking
Red Bull, he had neither grown wings nor had seen any athletic or intellectual enhancement
in his performance.
The advertisement - a metaphor or a deception

15. 15
Fig 6.
Source: Red Bull advertisement
So, this is the advertisement we're talking about. Wait, don't tell us, you're also feeling like Red
Bull literally meant it gives you wings! NO, please.
Basically, this was just a very clever bit of branding technique, indicating high Caffeine content.
Red Bull states that a 250ml can of its energy drink contains about 80mg of Caffeine, the same
amount as contained in a cup of coffee. And being an energy drink, they charged a premium over
a cup of coffee.
Anyway, how does Caffeine relate to wings, you ask? Well, first read this note from healthline.com
regarding the effects of Caffeine -- "Caffeine acts as a central nervous system stimulant. When it
reaches your brain, the most noticeable effect is alertness. You'll feel more awake and less tired,
so it's a common ingredient in medications to treat or manage drowsiness, headaches, and
migraines."
So, when Red Bull said it "gives you wings", what it basically meant was that it stimulates your
nervous system, reduces drowsiness, and makes you feel so cool and active. Thus, you feel light
and energetic. And it does, isn't it? Many even take it as a lite version of hard drinks! Gosh! So,
now you know, it didn't literally give you wings'. Rather, it is a metaphor (a word that carries a
different underlying meaning and not its literal interpretation).
His claim read - “Even though there is a lack of genuine scientific support for a claim that
Red Bull branded energy drinks provide any more benefit to a consumer than a cup of coffee,
the Red Bull defendants persistently and pervasively market their product as a superior
source of ‘energy’ worthy of a premium price over a cup of coffee or other sources of
caffeine.”

16. 16
Dove Elixir, Airtel, Godrej No.1 Soap, among 54 ads upheld by Consumer Complaints
Council for misleading customers
ASCI’s Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) upheld complaints against 54 out of 84
advertisements in September 2015. Out of 54 advertisements against which complaints were
upheld, 13 belonged to the Personal and Healthcare category, followed by 7 advertisements in the
Education category, 7 in telecommunication and broadband category, 6 in Ecommerce category
and 15 advertisements from other categories.
HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Dove Elixir): The advertisement’s claim, “Coconut oil penetrates only
through 1 layer in 30 minutes via visual representation” was found to be false and misleading.
Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. (Godrej No.1 Soap): The claim in the advertisement, “India’s
No. 1 Purest Soap”, was not substantiated with comparative data of "purity" of this
Amrita Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, “Experience rapid, complete and permanent
cure with Advanced Classical Homeopathy for Asthma”, was not substantiated with clinical
evidenceproduct versus other products.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd (Lux Scented Gold offer): The claim in the advertisement, “Pehli baar
scented gold jewellery chupi hai hasaro lux mein”, was considered misleading.
TELECOMMUNICATION & BROADBAND
Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Airtel broadband Services): The claim in the advertisement, “We at Airtel
are giving away exciting surprises to all our broadband users”, was misleading by omission of a
disclaimer qualifying the conditions under which the claim is tenable for the offer.
Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Airtel 4G): The claim offer of, “Get the same data benefits as your 3G pack
and enjoy superfast 4G speeds at no extra cost "FREE 4G UPGRADE"”, was found misleading.
Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Airtel-4G – My Plan Infinity): The advertisement’s claim, “Unlimited Calls,
Unlimited Movies, Unlimited Music and Loads of data”, was false and misleading.

17. 17
ECOMMERCE
Bookmyoffer.com: The claim “a SanDisk ultra micro SDHC USH-1 16 GB memory card,
Samsung data cable and Sony earphone for just Rs.199 All 3 (pack)”, was false and misleading.
Flipkart Internet Private Limited (Tek-Tron Velroc Safety Outdoor Shoes): The website
communication claims the MRP of the product as Rs.599, when actually printed MRP on product
is Rs.499.
Coupons Center (MakeMyTrip trippy Tuesdays Offer): The advertised claim, “Flat Rs.1200
off on Domestic Flights” was not substantiated.
Flipkart Internet Private Limited: The claim in the mailer, “Research shows that beautiful
women are more successful in their lives”, was not substantiated.

18. 18
MISLEADING ADVERTISEMENTS: HORLICKS LTD. VS. ZYDUS
INTRODUCTION
Broadly defining, a misleading advertisement may be described as any promotion (publicity,
propaganda, marketing, and selling) as well as advertisement through traditional media which
includes radios and television or electronic media like newspaper, posters, banners, wall-writing,
etc. to garble or falsify the nature, attributes, standard or topographical genesis of goods and services
with an intention to delude the customers. Misleading advertisements misstate competition and the
consumer’s choice. Thirty years into the enactment of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and a
prototype conveyance from Caveat Emptor to Caveat Venditor, Indian consumers are still getting
exploited by service providers of all sectors. A lot of advertisements these days are used as a tool
to mislead the public at large or become a nuisance element.
In a predominantly capitalist country like ours, advertisements are a fundamental pedigree for
generating consciousness and perception about any particular products and services. However, there
has been a paradigm shift. Advertisements are now conveyed through radios, televisions, print
media to social media platforms and through these, there remains a massive demand from the
customers. Companies press with the ingenious and radical approach in an order to attract their
customers and augment their sales. In this process, corporates often have a propensity to advocate
their brand in such a fashion that they show themselves superior to their competitors. One such
recent case of misleading advertisement is that of Horlicks Limited vs. Zydus
HORLICKS LIMITED VS. ZYDUS WELLNESS PRODUCTS LIMITED
Horlicks is one of the key brands in the health food drinks variety available in India. It is a brand
owned by the Hindustan Unilever Limited who acquired it from the GSK Consumer Healthcare in
the year 2020. It claims to have been clinically proven to make kids who drink this beverage
regularly taller, stronger, and sharper. It further asserts that regular consumption of Horlicks
combined with a healthy diet as well as a healthy lifestyle can lead to quantifiable enhancement in
the growth and development of the child along with better concentration power. Complain, on the
other hand, is a powdered milk energy drink which is again preferred in many Indian households.
It is a brand owned by Zydus Wellness Products Limited.

19. 19
In mid-2019, Complain (owned by Zydus) aired an advertisement and declared that one cup of
Complain was equivalent to two cups of Horlicks (owned by Unilever) thus providing the same
amount of protein in one cup of Complain that Horlicks furnished in two cups. A suit was filed in
the Delhi High Court by Horlicks seeking a permanent injunction prohibiting Zydus Wellness
Products from airing the disputed TVC.
Fig 7.
DECISION OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT
The Delhi High Court highlighted the category of the channel that was used to disseminate the
advertisement in this case. The Court marked that any advertisement aired through an electronic
form of media would lead to creating well-fortified repercussions on the customers than if it was
given out on print media. The Court was of the opinion that a viewer or a customer who sees any
advertisement of such a small duration cannot be expected to read any sort of textual disclaimer
given anywhere on the screen. Justice Mukta Gupta, the presiding Judge over the case, said that
under such circumstances, any viewer viewing the commercial would be deceived and Horlicks
(the plaintiff) would have to suffer an irredeemable loss. Thus, the High Court restrained the Zydus
Company from airing its commercial in the current form till the time the lawsuit that was initially
filed by Horlicks wasn’t disposed of.
OBSERVATIONS
This particular Order significantly differentiated between the gradations of advertisements
published in print media in contrast to electronic media. It exhibited that an uncongealed viewpoint

20. 20
was a prerequisite in determining similar content of advertisements when manifested in divergent
categories of media. This judgment also provides a basis on which courts and
companies/manufacturers can bank on while deciding and programming advertisements discretely.
NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF MISLEADING ADVERTISEMENTS
Misleading advertisements have far-reaching repercussions on the customers, their business and
employees, and on the perception of competition. These false advertisements might lead to the
customer being misinformed about a product or service and making wrong decisions. It leads to the
customer wasting their hard-earned money on the wrong product or service and being completely
unsatisfied along with creating havoc for them. These misleading advertisements often harm their
business as well as employees too. If a consumer is unhappy with the products or services of them,
they bad mouth it, and negative stories about the same start cooking up eventually damaging the
reputation of the company permanently. These often attract severe legal actions against them.
CONCLUSION
The law in regard to the misleading advertisements is rapidly changing. It may be fascinating to
observe that the Delhi High Court had earlier permitted the circulation of a similar kind of
advertisement (Horlicks Ltd. & Anr. v. Heinz India Pvt. Ltd.) in the form of print media but
inhibited the same when telecasted in the form of electronic media. This happened because
advertisement through electronic media is supposed to create a deeper impact on the audience than
through print media. Electronic media involves a merger of both audio and visual display which
more presumably impacts the audience and which is why it needs precise regulations.

21. 21
REFERENCES
1. Sagar Malviya, HUL acquires Horlicks from GSK for Rs 3,045 crore, The Economic Times
(Apr. 01, 2020 06:05 PM), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-
products/food/hul-acquires-horlicks-from-gsk-for-3045-
crore/articleshow/74928717.cms?from=mdr.
2. Ankush Mehta, Maitrayi Jain & Anushka Shah, Advertisement to Misleading
Advertisement/Horlicks Ltd. v. Zydus Wellness Products, The SCC Online Blog (July 30,
2020), https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/
3. Prathama Sharma, Delhi High Court restrains Zydus Wellness from airing its Complan
ad, Mint (May 14, 2020 11:51 PM), https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/delhi-
high-court-restrains-zydus-wellness-from-airing-its-complan-ad-11589480113968.html.
4. Press Trust of India, HC restrains Zydus from airing its Complan ad, says it disparages
Horlicks, Business Standard (May 14, 2020 09: 19 PM), https://www.business-
standard.com/article/pti-stories/hc-restrains-zydus-from-airing-its-complan-ad-says-it-
disparages-horlicks-120051401518_1.html.
5. Nicky LA Marco, Negative Effects of False Advertising, Chron (Dec. 03,
2018), https://smallbusiness.chron.com/negative-effects-false-advertising-25679.html.
6. The Impact of Electronic and Print Media on Disparagement and Comparative
Advertisements in Horlicks Ltd. 7 Ors. v. Zydus Wellness Products Ltd., Lexology (July 11,
2020), https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2699adad-f9ae-4e38-b80e-
071a023cf5f5.

22. 22
Shampoo advert banned over 'stronger hair' claim
A shampoo ad which claimed the product could make hair “up to 10 times stronger” should be
banned for being misleading, the advertising Standards Authority said. The industry watchdog
upheld five complaints against the television ad for Pantene Pro-V shampoo and conditioner, and
agreed with two viewers who found it misleading and its use of scientific jargon inappropriate.
According to the ad, the products contain "our first ever formula to help replenish key aminos" and
makes hair "up to 10 times stronger so it springs back to life".
But a scientific expert consulted by the ASA did not agree that the shampoo could "replenish"
amino acids.
The watchdog also challenged the ad's assertion that amino acids in the product were "key".
The expert found the two amino acids most often lost from human hair were not present in the
shampoo.
The ASA said viewers could be "misled" into thinking the amino acids in the product meant it
would improve hair strength more than any other shampoo and conditioner.
In a statement, Proctor & Gamble said the company was "surprised and disappointed" by the ASA's
decision.
Fig 7.

23. 23
How shampoo ads have us all fooled?
A popular haircare brand revealed all of the tricks other brands use in misleading hair ads.
Suave Professionals exposed how deceptive brands have been for decades when it comes to
advertising and achieving impossible hairstyles.
Even though companies are trying to sell false results, people are not falling for it as a shocking 74
per cent of millennial women don't believe they can achieve the hair shown in advertisements.
Fig 8.
One scene features a model in a sequin dress lying down on a black backdrop with her long and
luscious wavy blonde hair flowing behind her.
When the director yells cut the woman gets up while the hair that was actually extensions remains
glued to the background and the model reveals she actually has short dry hair.
In another scene depicting an ad on how to get smooth hair, a model is standing in front a green
screen while two people in green fencing suits stand on either side of her.
The two men in green fencing suits each have a fine brush and a sword in their hands as they blend
into the background while finely brushing the model's hair.
Meanwhile, as the fake commercials are being filmed, actual women are washing and styling their
hair using Suave products and seeing real results.

24. 24
Aside from the two tricks shown in the video, there are tons of other hacks that are used to make
hair look beautiful on camera when it's actually fake.
What Exactly is False Advertising
False advertising is what it sounds like: a promotion or ad that makes false or fundamentally
misleading representations.
The rule is this: While you are free to make subjective claims such as “Best Bagels in Town!” It
is illegal to make objectively false claims, such as “Voted the Best Bagel by the New York Bagel
Association!”
What’s the difference? An objective claim is independently verifiable, while a subjective claim is
merely an opinion.
Being voted best bagel is a fact. It can be confirmed by the bagel association and its data from the
contest. Saying you're the best bagel in town is your opinion based on your (or your customers')
personal taste.
Need another example? Advertising “50% off!” when the sale is only 10 percent off is false
advertising. Saying you have the best sale out there is an opinion, and as such, is permissible.
Fig 9.
What McDonald’s and Burger King’s Misleading Advertising Accusations Teach Us About
Marketing And Brand Trust
McDonalds’ case happened at the end of April and, since then, the company apologized for the
misleading nature of the advertisement. In an official statement to the website UOL, they said “the
launches bring the novelty of the exclusive Picanha-flavored sauce (with a natural aroma of
Picanha), a new presentation and a different hamburger in composition and size”.

25. 25
Since then, the food company removed the sandwich from all Brazilian restaurants. The advertising
watchdog CONAR opened an investigation about the case.
At the beginning of May, Burger King was criticized for the same practice. The “Ribs Whopper”
burger only contained “ribs aroma and flavor”, no pork ribs whatsoever. The company said they
were “always clear” about their ingredients, whatever that means. “Ribs Whopper” burger was
launched at the end of 2021, but after the Mc Picanha scandal, the misleading advertising came to
light to people and the media.
After the backlash, Burger King changed the burger name to “Pork Shoulder Whopper”.
Both companies said they included information about ingredients in the advertisements, informing
that both “picanha” and “ribs” were mere flavors added to the burger. But they chose to include this
information in very small letters, which can mislead consumers.
Fig 10.

26. 26
Types of Unethical Advertising you Should Be Aware Of
▪ Misleading Ads
▪ Hidden Fees
▪ Misleading images
▪ Pressure Tactics
▪ False Endorsements
▪ Exaggerated results
▪ Deceptive Pricing
Fig 11.
▪ Objectifying
▪ Exploiting Social Issues
▪ Plagiarism
Misleading
Advertising
Incorrect
interpretation
Affected
customers
A purposeful
misrepresentation

27. 27
Prevalent forms of misleading advertisements
One example is the case of milk advertisements to children. A number of milk companies
claim that their products enhance performance during sports.  Additionally, certain
advertisements use celebrities to endorse their products. By doing this, the products will be
creating the impression that it is those food products that can cause one to live their dreams
or live a celebrity-like life. Children usually take things at face value and this misleads them
into purchasing those items as they are.  Another interesting feature about advertisements
to children is that most of them are usually done for products that are low in nutrients; these
include breakfast cereals and other junk foods. Such foods are high in sugar and low in other
essential nutrients.
However, many companies do not include that information in their advertisements; instead,
most of them assert that children should actually purchase the products so as to become
healthy. This is very misleading and can cause children to become overweight or even
obese. In close relation to this example is the labelling of food as containing zero fat.
This is also another gimmick that could cause dire consequences to the consumer because
it does not necessarily mean that the item has no fat at all; it simply means that its fat content
is lower than in other similar products. This means that when consumers continually
purchase and use such food items, then they may still be subjected to the same health
problems that their counterparts eating the non-low fat foods are.
The advertisements regarding fairness creams, getting slimmer or taller by popping pills or
the claims by unscrupulous financial institutions regarding giving unrealistic higher returns
on investments trick gullible consumers in purchasing their goods or services.
The issues:
• There are a number of issues that have been plaguing the marketing scene with regard to
misleading advertisement. The first one amongst this is advertisements made to children.
These advertisements are created in such a manner that they target individuals who do not
have the capability of differentiating fact from fiction hence it can be argued that those
advertisements are actually misleading.

28. 28
• Children in India constitute 18.7% of the world's kid’s population and one-third of India’s
population is under 15 years of age. A survey by ac Nielsen showed that an average child
watches TV for about 3 hours on week days and 3.7 hours on weekends. About half of this
time is spent watching the advertisements which can affect the behaviour of the child.
• The advertisers use superlatives to boast the merits of their products like.... the best,
number one, cheapest, greatest, finest, etc. but the subjective statements of opinion about a
product's quality are so untrue that it becomes an outright spoof and which is not true.
• Often consumer is lured into a retail outlet by an advertisement for a low cost item and
then is sold a higher priced version. Once the consumer enters the store, he/she is pressured
to purchase another more expensive item. In such stores, one finds a handful of out-dated
products on the discount announced and other better products as 'fresh stock'.
• Advertisement is not restricted to products that are good and useful to the people. In India,
advertisements for cigarettes, liquor, and pan masala (chewed tobacco), products that are
harmful to the public continue to find a place in the TV channels, despite the ban imposed
by the government of India.
• False and misleading advertisements in fact violate the right choice, the right to be
informed and protected against unsafe goods and services as well unfair trade practices.
• Despite several laws meant to protect consumers against such unfair trade practices, false
and misleading advertisements continue to exploit the consumer
Steps taken by the Department of Consumer Affairs to tackle the menace of misleading
advertisements:
This Department has set up an Inter-Ministerial Monitoring Committee on Misleading
Advertisements vide OM dated 21.02.2014 having members drawn from different
Ministries and authorities. Advertisement standards Council of India is also represented in
the said Committee. o This department is developing a web portal which would enable
consumers to lodge complaints against misleading advertisements. Counter Campaign
strategies are being worked out with FSSAI and other authorities like RBI NPPA etc.
Industry body has been asked to bring out a document titled Corporate Consumer
responsibility which would contain code of business ethics on unfair trade practices
including misleading advertisements.

29. 29
The existing regulatory authorities:
1. Food Safety and Standards Authority (FSSAI)
2. Central Drugs Standard Central Organization (CDSCO)
3. Insurance Regulatory Development Authority
4. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
5. Securities and Exchange Board of India
False or misleading representations explained
It is unlawful to make false or misleading representations about products and services when
supplying, offering to supply or promoting those products or services.
For instance, a business must not make false or misleading representations about:
• the standard, quality, value or grade of products or services
• the composition style, model or history of products
• whether the products are new
• a particular person agreeing to acquire products or services
• testimonials by any person relating to products or services
• the sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, benefits and uses of
products or services
• the price of products or services
• the availability of repair facilities or spare parts
• the place of origin of a product - for example, where it was made or assembled.
• a buyer's need for the products or services
• any guarantee, warranty or condition on the products or services.
Courts have found false and misleading representations in these cases -
• manufacturer sold socks, which were not pure cotton, labelled as ‘pure cotton’
• retailer placed a label on garments showing a sale price and a higher, crossed-out price.
However, the garments had never sold for the higher price

30. 30
• business made a series of untrue representations about the therapeutic benefits of negative
ion mats it sold
• motor repairer told a consumer more repair work was needed on their car than was
necessary.
Whether a representation is considered false or misleading will depend on the circumstances of
each case, and what misleads one group of consumers may not necessarily mislead others.
For example, people concerned about their body image may be more vulnerable to products
claiming to enhance beauty. Whether a representation about a beauty product was misleading
would depend on whether it might mislead a reasonable person within this group.
A representation can be misleading even if it is partly true.
Case Study
On the front of its product packaging, a business claimed its batteries lasted as long as those of
two other competitors. The claim was supported by tests, but only against some (not all) of the
competitors’ batteries. This was explained on the back of the packaging. A court found the message
on the front of the packaging had misled consumers, even though there was a clearer message on
the back of the packaging.
Misleading conduct as to the nature of products and services
A business must not engage in conduct likely to mislead the public about the:
• nature
• manufacturing process
• characteristics
• suitability for purpose, or
• quantity
Examples:
An importer sells bicycle helmets with labels indicating the helmets meet a mandatory safety
standard, even though the helmets have not been laboratory tested to check whether they meet the
standard.

31. 31
Penalties
Making false or misleading representations is an offence.
The maximum civil pecuniary and criminal penalties for a body corporate are the greater
of:
• $10 million, or three times the value of the benefit obtained from the offence, or act or
omission, by the body corporate and any related bodies corporate if the benefit obtained can
be determined by the court, or
• if the court cannot determine the value of the benefit, 10 per cent of the annual turnover of
the body corporate.
The maximum penalty for a person is $500,000.
Other civil remedies include:
• injunctions
• damages
• compensatory orders
• orders for non-party consumers
• non-punitive orders
• adverse publicity
• disqualification orders.

32. 32
Conclusion
In conclusion, misleading advertisements are a major concern in today’s society. They not only
harm the reputation of the company, but also deceive the customers by providing false information.
Misleading advertisements can take many forms, such as overstating the product’s benefits, using
fake testimonials, or making false claims.
Consumers have the right to receive accurate and truthful information about the products they
purchase. Therefore, it is important for companies to be transparent and ethical in their advertising
practices. Governments also have a role to play in protecting consumers by implementing strict
laws and regulations against misleading advertisements.
In addition, consumers can protect themselves by being aware of the signs of a misleading
advertisement and by doing their own research before making a purchase. By staying informed and
vigilant, consumers can make more informed decisions and avoid falling victim to deceptive
advertisements.

33. 33
Reference
• Federal Trade Commission (FTC). (n.d.). Protecting Consumers. Retrieved from
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/advertising-and-marketing/advertising
• Better Business Bureau (BBB). (n.d.). Misleading Advertising. Retrieved from
https://www.bbb.org/article/tips/17116-misleading-advertising
• International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). (n.d.). ICC Marketing and Advertising.
Retrieved from https://iccwbo.org/policy/marketing-advertising/
• Association of National Advertisers (ANA). (n.d.). Ethics & Self-Regulation. Retrieved
from https://www.ana.net/content/show/id/ethics
• American Marketing Association (AMA). (n.d.). Code of Ethics. Retrieved from
https://www.ama.org/resources/pages/code-of-ethics
• Gonsalves, A. (2019, December 12). Misleading Advertisements: A Growing Concern in
the Digital Age. Forbes. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonygonsalves/2019/12/12/misleading-advertisements-
a-growing-concern-in-the-digital-age/?sh=3f2412ea6ff7
• Sande fur, J. (2018, June 19). Misleading Advertising: The Cost to Consumers and
Businesses. Medium. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@SandefurJ/misleading-
advertising-the-cost-to-consumers-and-businesses-dfc71c7fad75
• Youn, J. (2017, August 22). Misleading Advertising: How to Spot It and What to Do About
It. Consumer Reports. Retrieved from https://www.consumerreports.org/consumer-
protection/how-to-spot-misleading-advertising/