5 Written questions
5 Matching questions
- Concerns of children's advertising
- Social-psychological representations/Evaluative claims
- How is the Lanham Act different from the FTC Act
- Examples of deceptive mock-up
- a 1. Distortion of product performance: causing children to expect something that d/n pan out
2. Confusion over prices: leads to disappointment
3. Promoting poor nutrition habits
4. Premiums that create artificial demand: showcasing toys as benefit of cereal
5. surrogate salesmen (child begs parent for something)
6. promise to affect mood or well being
7. use of programmed character to sell products
8. products/ads that might call psychological harm
- b 1. Volvo - ran an ad intending to show the strength of their vehicles. Agency, Scaly McCaid, got screwed
2. Libby Owens Ford Glass - Vaseline on car window. FTC regulated because it was deceptive.
- c Comes from the Balkan wars where territories were broken up. Advertising regulation would break up into a lot of parts and there would be no unified regulations so any national advertiser would face completely different laws from state to state. As a result the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) said the FTC had a point and created guidelines that said if you follow them you will stay out of trouble.
- d These are the I prefer... claims. They are different from factual claims. These claims have a higher potential to deceive b/c of perception differences. These "feeling claims" are very hard to prove. They are EXTRINSIC to the product (not a phsyical part of it). ONLY the consumer can EVALUATE if the ad delivered what it said. Examples - Seagrams gin is "smooth" AND "Feel like a man" AND Maxwell house instant relation.
- e The Lanham Act allows competitors to sue, the FTC is only the government. Also this act allows punitive damages. You can sue for 3x damages, meaning that you can earn 3x what you lost on the competitors infringement on your trademark. You can also sue the competitor for the profits they made.
5 Multiple choice questions
- Used a tv demonstration that highlighted the super moisturizing abilities of Rapid-Shave. Showed the razor shaving a sheet of sandpaper but the problem was that is was actually plexiglas not sandpaper. The FTC say this as deceptive because it showed fake proof. This case went all the way to the SC who upheld the decision but it lead to disclaimers in advertisements
- If you make a claim that endangers someone's safety these act can regulate.
- In 1974 it added onto NAD/NARB, unit tasked with focusing only on children's advertising (Kellogs and Matel chipped in to help form it). It was small but fairly effective
- 1. Free speech
2. Better Knowledge (consumer sovereignty/the consumer receives more informaiton)
3. Lowers prices
4. Forces upgrades
5. May rpovide better informaiton
- The FTC went too far in this case. ______ was charged with deceptive advertising for selling permanent hair color. The FTC thought that the word permanent would mislead women into thinking that it would color hair that hadn't grown out yet. A woman testified about the third person effect of this. People complained and said that the FTC had gone too far to protect ignoramuses. Help lead to the reasonable man standard.
5 True/False questions
Spoof → A ______ is an obvious lie; they are falase facts that are not believed and are not deceptive. Two types of spoofs explicit and implied
Consumer Redress → Some judges weren't happy with how Section 13B only issued a temporary injunction. So judges decided that they were going to order advertisers to pay money back to the consumers. This was a real threat to consumers and opened up new opportunities for the FTC. It was also only supposed to be for the worst cases but the FTC finds many cases to be the worst.
Oxydol Example → Dealing with materiality. - In the early 1970s, it started advertising that it was the laundry detergent with the green crystals. The implication was that the green crystals made it better. You buy the laundry detergent and find out that the crystals are blue. You have been deceived because the crystals are blue NOT green but no one cares. It does not matter. This is an example of a trivial exception it is NOT material. No one will get hurt based on trivial deception.
2 Major Concerns regarding children and the Internet → 1. Privacy (spam-intrusiveness/phishing=misuse of private info;gathering personal information, gets enough info and can get into bank account etc.)
3. Protecting children
4. vary from state to state
5. Social Problems - Internet addiction to tobacco industry's own website
6. Copyrights and trademarks - easy to copy and steal other's publications
7. Regulation - who is going to regulate/who is in charge of the Internet
Examples of corrective advertising → 1. Campbell's Soup - Claimed to have more meat/veggies in their soup, but used marbles to make the chunks rise to top. (1970) Banzhaf's students Students Opposing Unfair Practices (SOUP). However, this case was strong enough to implement a Cease and Desist order, so turned to Listerine Case.
2. Listerine - Had been telling consumers for 100 years that Listerine would prevent colds, which was a lie. By the time the FDA was formed, Listerine had already made the claim so the FDA grandfathered in the claim, but prevented others from making the claim. Listerine had to disclose: "Contrary to prior advertising, Listerine will not help prevent colds or sore throats or lessen their severity." Listerine appealed and the FTC decided Listerine could take out the first four words because it was too much like punishment.