Download Deceptive Advertising

Wells 1
Deceptive Advertising
For years now, marketers, public relations practitioners, and advertisers all over the world
have struggled with the effects of deceptive advertising. Deception is a very confusing and
difficult trait to recognize and pinpoint in an advertisement, thus the struggle in the industry.
Deception can, and should be, eliminated from today’s society. The cycle to eliminating
deception is broken down into a two-part process, understanding and recognition. In order to
beat the deception of an advertisement, the haunting deception must be recognized. This too is
difficult because in order to recognize the deception, one must first understand it. The solution
to the problem of deceptive advertisements is consumer education. Educated consumers avoid
deception by using their knowledge on deceptive advertisements and how they can deceive.
Once the deception can be understood, it becomes more easily recognizable to the audience.
Being able to identify deception in an advertisement consequently defeats the entire purpose of
deception and eliminates it. Perception is reality, and if one perceives an advertisement as being
deceptive, then that wavering deception ceases to exist.
First in the process of understanding deception is defining it. Just like any other word,
there are many definitions and ways to define it. There is no statutory definition of
deceptiveness (Hyman). Among the many assorted definitions for deception, it is most simply
termed as a trick. Deception is very misleading, and any definition of deception holds a
negative connotation. Deception is never the truth, and is never quite what it appears to be. An
English critic, William Hazlet once said, “Life is the art of being well deceived; and in order that
the deception may succeed it must be habitual and uninterrupted.” Deception aims to go
Wells 2
unnoticed, so it is only successful if it is unknown to the audience. For example, the sellers of
Acai Berry had to stop production in 2010 because their consumers were being scammed.
Consumers were promised a ‘risk-free’ trial of the product, and then were later billed by the
company repeatedly for that free trial. Also, the company used fake endorsees to promote a
faulty product (Becker). If the consumers of Acai Berry could see how they were being
scammed, they would have avoided the company, and the deception in the advertisements would
not have worked. To avoid further scams similar to this one, consumers should always be
cautious about free trials. Research the product first, because most companies will mail the free
trial but will not cancel the subscription. Consumer knowledge about the products they buy will
help prevent any scams or deception from occurring.
Companies like the American Marketing Association go in-depth with defining deceptive
advertisements and claims. The AMA defines deceptive advertising as: “An advertisement that
is intended to mislead consumers by (1) falsely making claims, (2) failure to make disclosure, or
(3) a combination of both.” Also, any omission of information in an advertisement is also
considered deceptive (Nagar). Another more descriptive definition of deceptive advertising
comes from an experimental study done by Hasseb Shabbir. The definition he pulled came from
more of a ‘societal marketing-oriented standpoint.’ It defines deceptive advertising as: “any act,
claim, or message that (1) causes at least some consumer acting reasonably to make decisions
they would not make otherwise, (2) leads consumers acting reasonably to believe something
about a product, brand, or manufacturer that is not verifiably true, and (3) has the potential to
foster distrust of any kind, general or specific, or any other ways causing an erosion of unethical
values deemed desirable about society” (Shabbir). What both of these definitions come down to
is ethics. Shabbir said it best, that “advertising has become synonymous with ethics in
Wells 3
marketing.” If an advertisement fails to remain ethical, then it will more than likely be
categorized as deceptive.
The next step in the process of eliminating deception in advertisements is recognizing
where the deception lies. Many television advertisements today promote new products that are
good for your health, or ‘miracle products.’ Any ‘miracle product,’ or something that seems too
good to be true, should be a trigger to immediately look for deception. Product labels are also a
trigger for deception. Learning how to read the labels of products is key to being able to avoid
deception in that form. When looking at a label, be sure to catch on to key words such as
‘organic’ or ‘all-natural.’ On food labels, look at the product information and ingredients to
define these terms. For example, the term ‘all-natural’ on a food label is supposed to mean that
the products has no artificial ingredients, and is minimally processed (Kotz). However, only
products containing meat or poultry have to abide by this definition. For any other product
regulated by the FDA, they can define their ‘all-natural’ product however they see fit (Kotz).
This goes back to the first step in the process of eliminating deception; definitions are key.
In another more recent example from September 2011, the Food and Drug
Administration warned the company, Chronicity Inc., to change the false health claims and labels
on its website (Deardorff). The “NutriElement” supplements this company produced used
therapeutic claims, causing them to be unapproved drugs because they promised to cure, and
prevent the diseases they treat. The problem with this is dietary supplements, unlike drugs, are
not tested for safety by the FDA before they hit the open market. It is up to the company to
prove that their supplements work, are safe, and are labeled correctly (Deardorff). From both of
the FDA cases, one can conclude that the FDA does not have control over everything. Although
they can cease a product or advertisement once it has been deemed deceptive, they do not test
Wells 4
every single product before that point. Therefore, it is likely to assume that the deceptive
advertisement or product will get to the consumer before the FDA can find it.
Like the example above, additional places where deceptive advertising may lie is with
some medical products. Last year, a worldwide advertising campaign promoting a new product
called ‘Latisse’ proved to be deceptive. This product was a prescription medication approved for
thickening eyelashes. The campaign even featured a celebrity spokesperson, Brooke Shields
(Haupt). The advertisements showed Shields and her full, luscious eyelashes, but failed to
include possible, severe side effects of the product. After the Food and Drug Administration
ordered a correction of the deceptive advertisements, the ‘Latisse’ website now includes a
section on the safety of the product (Haupt). Deception is intertwined into advertising in many
different ways, so even a medication could deceive you and not be what you expected. Always
make an appointment with your doctor for a check-up before using a new medication seen on
television, even over the counter. There are so many side-effects that could affect consumers,
and they do not meet the medical requirements for the product.
The ‘Latisse’ example is just one of a few methods used in deceptive advertising. There
are many advertisements today that will use different methods to cover up the deception of an
advertisement. Today, one of the most popular ways to mask deception is through humor. In
2007, the Journal of Advertising published an experimental research conducted by researcher
Shabbir. For the study, Shabbir produced a content analysis of 238 humorous advertisements.
His purpose then was to determine whether or not humor was used to mask these deceptive
claims. After the assessment, deceptive claims were found in 73.5% of the advertisements and
74.5% used humor to mask the claims (Shabbir). Since there are many types of humor, this
characteristic of a deceptive advertisement would be the hardest to recognize. All types of
Wells 5
humor have different connotations, and can easily mask the deception of an advertisement. For
instance, one type of humor brought up in the report was called disparagement. This type works
to derive humor from ridicule and criticism, or another type of mockery (Shabbir). If an
advertisement uses this type of humor, it is harder for consumers to decipher whether or not there
is deception because mockery and making fun of a certain subject is a matter of one’s opinion.
The bottom line is everyone responds differently to different types of humor. What one
consumer may think is funny and respond to, another may think the opposite. This is why it is
important that consumers recognize the different types of humor used in deceptive
advertisements, whether they find them humorous or not.
Using humor to deceive is also seen a lot in the media today. Defamation is a common
term used to describe both libel and slander. Libel is a printed falsehood, while slander is an oral
falsehood. Both of these types of falsehoods are known as defamation laws (Seitel). Many times
people can commit either a libel or slander offense through advertisements, but lately a lot of
celebrities are also being charged for defamation of other celebrities. Whether in an
advertisement or not, defamation can be proved only if four requirements have been met:
1. The defamation was communicated through print, broadcast, or any other electronic
means (Seitel).
2. The person who is the subject of the defamation was identified, or easily identifiable
(Seitel).
3. The identified person has suffered injury—in the form of monetary loss, reputational
loss, or mental suffering (Seitel).
4. The person making the statement was malicious or grossly negligent (Seitel).
Wells 6
As mentioned briefly before, celebrities and public figures are now seen more in the
media for filing defamation cases against the media. There are certain types of rules that now
protect defamation laws for public figures and others. For any public figure, the court has to
prove there was a malicious intent by the defendant (Crawford).
However, if the plaintiff can
prove that the defendant or media acted with actual malice, then the defamation can be proved
(Seitel). In an example from the textbook, The Practice of Public Relations, an Atlanta security
guard, Richard A. Jewell, sued NBC News and the Atlanta Journal- Constitution in 1996 for their
reports that Jewell was the main suspect in the Atlanta Olympic bombing. Jewell proved that the
reports were disruptive to his life and tarnished his name as an officer, and subsequently he was
cleared of any involvement with the bombing. He also reached an agreement with the media to
refrain from any type of libel lawsuit (Seitel). Cases like this one and others are now seen as
historical libel cases and are taught in textbooks and classrooms nationwide.
Many times in lawsuits, like defamation cases, in order for the falsehood or deception to
be recognized and proved, one must first realize the motive for the deception. Online research
pulled from author Neil Rowe, outlines another way of classifying deception, through
motivation. Deception is broken down into a series of lies, and Rowe lists several reasons for
lying to deceive - including lying for enjoyment and lying to create a sense of power. No matter
the reasoning for the deception, the consumer needs to recognize these lies as deception. Many
advertisements will lie and tell the consumer that their product is guaranteed to work or it will
make you look slimmer in an allotted timeframe. Consumers need to realize that a product is
only as good as they believe it to be, and be cautious of the lies and deception that advertisement
will bring.
Wells 7
For many companies, deception can destroy a company, their image, and reputation. The
nation’s consumer protection agency, the Federal Trade Commission, deals with many
company’s deceptive advertisements on a daily basis. In 1991, the FTC issued a complaint on a
very widely used, familiar, household brand, Stouffer Foods. Stouffer had published
advertisements that were misleading and misrepresented the brand and its products (Andrews,
Craig, and Maronick). Stouffer’s product, Lean Cuisine falsely represented the sodium content
of its entrees. Stouffer fired back arguing that its campaign was focused on great tastes and
controlled fat, calories, and sodium (Andrews, Craig, and Maronick). However, trial evidence
proved through copy tests that the company did misrepresent their product. This case goes to
show how tricky deception can be. Although the company may or may not have been covering
up their deception, they fought back and stayed true to their campaign to show consumers they
were still a respectable brand. Deceptive advertising strikes hard and can lead to many downfalls
for companies. Once a company is seen as a deceiver, an advertiser who innocently, negligently,
or maliciously sponsors a deceptive advertising campaign (Hyman), it is hard for that company
to bounce back. However, even though Stouffer lost the case, their empire did not fall because
they were strong enough to recover and delete the deception.
Both the FTC and the FDA deal with deceptive advertisements, meaning they both have
to have their own definitions of deception. The FTC’s criterion is deceptive, while the FDA’s is
misleading (Preston). Despite these differences, the FTC and FDA both concern themselves
with deceptive advertisements and how to stop them. The FTC, for example, does not solely rely
on the term deceptive (Preston). The FTC Act was amended in 1938 to prohibit “any false
advertisement” for food, drugs, medical devices, or cosmetics. The act then defined a false
advertisement as one that was “misleading in a material respect” (Preston). Whether an
Wells 8
advertisement is defined as being misleading or deceptive, the FDA and FTC have the authority
to obtain the law and go after these offenders.
In conclusion, to truly reverse the cycle of deception, a consumer must be able to have a
full understanding of deception and recognize where it lies. Knowledge is power, and in order to
gain the knowledge to eliminate deception in advertisements, consumers must self-educate.
Only the strong survive in today’s economy, and no one should chance falling victim to a
deceptive advertisement. The more consumers know about the products they buy and the
companies that produce them, the less likely they are to fall prey to the ones who use deception.
If knowledgeable consumers can identify deception in an advertisement and understand it, then
deception will ultimately be eliminated altogether.
Wells 9
Works Cited
Andrews, Craig, and Thomas Maronick. "Advertising Research Issues From FTC Versus
Stouffer Foods Corporation." Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 14.2 (1995): n.pag.
ProQuest. Web. 4 Nov 2011.
Becker, Nathan. "Online Sellers of Acai Berry Told to Stop." Wall Street Journal (2010): n.pag.
ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct 2011.
Crawford, Michael. The Journalist's Legal Guide. Carswell: The Carswell Co. Ltd., 1986. Print.
Deardorff, Julie. "FDA Warns Company About Deceptive Supplement Claim." Chicago Tribune.
22 Sept 2011, n. pag. Web. 14 Nov. 2011.
Haupt, Angela. "7 Marketing Claims That Took Heat." U.S. News 06 Oct 2010, n. pag. Web. 7
Dec. 2011. <http://health.usnews.com/health-news/diet-fitness/diet/articles/2010/10/06/7marketing-claims-that-took-heat?PageNr=1>.
Hazlet, William. Web. 5 Oct. 2011.
<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/williamhaz388985.html>.
Hyman, Michael. "Deception in Advertising: A Proposed Complex of Defintions for
Researchers, Lawyers, and Regulators." International Journal of Advertising. 9. (1990):
259-270. Web. 14 Nov. 2011.
Wells 10
Kotz, Deborah. "False Claims on Mouthwash? How to Decipher Product Labels." U.S. News 29
Sep 2010, n. pag. Web. 7 Dec. 2011. <http://health.usnews.com/health-news/dietfitness/diet/articles/2010/09/29/false-claims-on-mouthwash-how-to-decipher-productlabels>.
Nagar, Komal. "Effect of Deceptive Advertising on Claim Recall: An Experimental Research."
Journal of Services Research 9.2 (2010): 105-123. ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct 2011.
Preston, Ivan. "Marketing Notes and Communications." Journal of Marketing . 40. (1976): 5459. Print.
Rowe, Neil. "Types of Online Deception." . U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, n.d. Web. 4 Nov
2011. <http://faculty.nps.edu/ncrowe/virtcomm160.htm>.
Seitel, Fraser. The Practice of Public Relations. 10th. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson
Education Inc., 2007. Print.
Shabbir, Haseeb. "The Use of Humor to Mast Deceptive Advertising: It's No Laughing Matter."
Journal of Advertising 36.2 (2007): n.pag. ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct 2011.