Landmark Ruling: ads are deceptive - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ARTelevision · 05-30-2003, 11:47 AM

A whole mass media ad campaign costing many millions of dollars ruled deceptive...

Imagine if this became a trend!
.................................................
Judge bars P&G from claiming superiority to Playtex tampon product
Associated Press, 5/30/2003

NEW YORK (AP) A judge has barred the Procter & Gamble Co. from claiming that its new tampon product is superior to a rival Playtex Products Inc. tampon, forcing the giant consumer products company to recall its advertising and display campaign.

U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley's order, issued late Thursday and filed in court Friday, followed a jury verdict last week that awarded $2.96 million in damages to Playtex, a Westport, Conn., company.

Playtex had accused the Cincinnati-based P&G of falsely claiming that its product, Tampax Pearl, provided superior comfort, protection and absorbency over the Playtex Gentle Glide tampon.

In his order, Pauley blocked P&G from using words such as ''superior,'' ''better'' or ''more'' in comparisons of its product to the Playtex tampon.

He ordered P&G to stop making false claims in its television and print advertising, its packaging, direct mail materials and coupons.

The judge also ordered P&G to notify its distributors, wholesalers and retailers that they must stop displaying anything that makes the false claims.

Jay Gooch, a P&G spokesman, said the company had already begun complying with the judge's order.

''We respectfully accept the court's ruling requiring that we stop making our Tampax Pearl advertising claims of superior wearing comfort and superior protection versus Playtex Gentle Glide,'' he said.

He said the company would continue to appeal the jury verdict but wanted to correct a statement in which it claimed a week earlier that the ''most meaningful verdict'' was handed down each day by thousands of women at the store shelf who chose the new P&G product.

''We completely respect the integrity of the court and the jury's verdict,'' Gooch said.

In a statement Friday, Playtex Chief Executive Officer Michael Gallagher said P&G's ''extensive use of false and misleading advertising for the last nine months has misled consumers and the retail trade.

''We expect the jury verdict and this injunction will put an end to this practice of deception by Procter & Gamble,'' he said.

Playtex controls about 30 percent of the tampon market, while P&G has about 40 percent of that market.
..................................................................
So many people accept the fact that the overwhelming majority of advertising is deceptive, as if there's nothing that can be done about it.

Here's exactly what can be done about it.
There is no legal reason this exact same type of ruling could not be used for the products we are misled to buy every day!
........

Conclamo Ludus · 05-30-2003, 04:05 PM

A cause for happiness and freedom from dangerous and subversive advertisements for vaginas everywhere. Celebrate vaginas! Celebrate!

BBtB · 05-31-2003, 10:14 AM

Actully it looks your title kept more people from comming. I know I skipped over this thread a few times just because the title confused me. At any rate I say bravo. Even though it is just one multimillion doller company doing nut flexing towards another. Considering the fact that so many people will see the comercial that says that "product a IS better then product b" for whatever reason. So even though product b has done them well they go out and buy product a OR even worse its two new products and they use that to go with product a even though they are both good products and product b is just as good or better.

ARTelevision · 05-31-2003, 11:03 AM

BBtB, thanks for your suggestion...
The more I think about this it IS a landmark ruling.
I edited it to make the issue more clear.

4thTimeLucky · 05-31-2003, 11:07 AM

In the UK you can't say that your product is superior to another. Problem solved.

Macheath · 05-31-2003, 11:12 AM

Excellent, it might seem small in comparison to all of the dishonesty out there in the advertising world - but the little things add up, especially when you can make a good clear legal precedent.

The_Dude · 05-31-2003, 11:32 AM

did the judge test these products or what?

Frowning Budah · 06-01-2003, 08:40 AM

The_Dude, that is what I was asking when I read the article. Maybe Tampax Pearl is better. How would the Judge know?

ARTelevision · 06-01-2003, 09:24 AM

Claims like this are easily disproved by various tests, such as dunking them in water and measuring their saturation points, user testing, etc.

Lawyers present the results of their studies.
The judge reads them, listens to arguments and makes a decision.

~springrain · 06-01-2003, 09:34 AM

Good God... *laughing*... women don't give a SHIT about what an ad campaign says when it comes to buying tampons...
i find the entire lawsuit frivolous and ridiculous...
companies are constantly claiming to be "better", "superior", "new", "improved", etc. etc. etc... and anyone who has half a brian knows it all to be marketing BULLSHIT.

not until there is "advertising reform" in this country, will any of this ever really change...
and let's be real... we can't even figure out campaign reform, or even how to elect a president, let alone how to regulate advertising!

trust me...

when it comes to purchasing tampons... ads campaigns have about as much impact as a fart in a windstorm...
at first... it's trial and error...
then, you stick with whatever works best for you... period. (no pun intended)

05-30-2003, 11:47 AM	#1 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	A whole mass media ad campaign costing many millions of dollars ruled deceptive... Imagine if this became a trend! ................................................. Judge bars P&G from claiming superiority to Playtex tampon product Associated Press, 5/30/2003 NEW YORK (AP) A judge has barred the Procter & Gamble Co. from claiming that its new tampon product is superior to a rival Playtex Products Inc. tampon, forcing the giant consumer products company to recall its advertising and display campaign. U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley's order, issued late Thursday and filed in court Friday, followed a jury verdict last week that awarded $2.96 million in damages to Playtex, a Westport, Conn., company. Playtex had accused the Cincinnati-based P&G of falsely claiming that its product, Tampax Pearl, provided superior comfort, protection and absorbency over the Playtex Gentle Glide tampon. In his order, Pauley blocked P&G from using words such as ''superior,'' ''better'' or ''more'' in comparisons of its product to the Playtex tampon. He ordered P&G to stop making false claims in its television and print advertising, its packaging, direct mail materials and coupons. The judge also ordered P&G to notify its distributors, wholesalers and retailers that they must stop displaying anything that makes the false claims. Jay Gooch, a P&G spokesman, said the company had already begun complying with the judge's order. ''We respectfully accept the court's ruling requiring that we stop making our Tampax Pearl advertising claims of superior wearing comfort and superior protection versus Playtex Gentle Glide,'' he said. He said the company would continue to appeal the jury verdict but wanted to correct a statement in which it claimed a week earlier that the ''most meaningful verdict'' was handed down each day by thousands of women at the store shelf who chose the new P&G product. ''We completely respect the integrity of the court and the jury's verdict,'' Gooch said. In a statement Friday, Playtex Chief Executive Officer Michael Gallagher said P&G's ''extensive use of false and misleading advertising for the last nine months has misled consumers and the retail trade. ''We expect the jury verdict and this injunction will put an end to this practice of deception by Procter & Gamble,'' he said. Playtex controls about 30 percent of the tampon market, while P&G has about 40 percent of that market. .................................................................. So many people accept the fact that the overwhelming majority of advertising is deceptive, as if there's nothing that can be done about it. Here's exactly what can be done about it. There is no legal reason this exact same type of ruling could not be used for the products we are misled to buy every day! ........ __________________ create evolution Last edited by ARTelevision; 05-31-2003 at 11:01 AM..

05-30-2003, 04:05 PM	#2 (permalink)
Conclamo Ludus Modern Man Location: West Michigan	A cause for happiness and freedom from dangerous and subversive advertisements for vaginas everywhere. Celebrate vaginas! Celebrate! __________________ Lord, have mercy on my wicked soul I wouldn't mistreat you baby, for my weight in gold. -Son House, Death Letter Blues

05-31-2003, 10:14 AM	#3 (permalink)
BBtB ClerkMan! Location: Tulsa, Ok.	Actully it looks your title kept more people from comming. I know I skipped over this thread a few times just because the title confused me. At any rate I say bravo. Even though it is just one multimillion doller company doing nut flexing towards another. Considering the fact that so many people will see the comercial that says that "product a IS better then product b" for whatever reason. So even though product b has done them well they go out and buy product a OR even worse its two new products and they use that to go with product a even though they are both good products and product b is just as good or better. __________________ Meridae'n once played "death" at a game of chess that lasted for over two years. He finally beat death in a best 34 out of 67 match. At that time he could ask for any one thing and he could wish for the hope of all mankind... he looked death right in the eye and said ... "I would like about three fiddy"

05-31-2003, 11:03 AM	#4 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	BBtB, thanks for your suggestion... The more I think about this it IS a landmark ruling. I edited it to make the issue more clear. __________________ create evolution

05-31-2003, 11:07 AM	#5 (permalink)
4thTimeLucky Psycho Location: 4th has left the building - goodbye folks	In the UK you can't say that your product is superior to another. Problem solved. __________________ I've been 4thTimeLucky, you've been great. Goodnight and God bless!

05-31-2003, 11:12 AM	#6 (permalink)
Macheath Junkie Location: Sydney, Australia	Excellent, it might seem small in comparison to all of the dishonesty out there in the advertising world - but the little things add up, especially when you can make a good clear legal precedent.

05-31-2003, 11:32 AM	#7 (permalink)
The_Dude The GrandDaddy of them all! Location: Austin, TX	did the judge test these products or what? __________________ "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

06-01-2003, 08:40 AM	#8 (permalink)
Frowning Budah Slave of Fear	The_Dude, that is what I was asking when I read the article. Maybe Tampax Pearl is better. How would the Judge know?

06-01-2003, 09:24 AM	#9 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Claims like this are easily disproved by various tests, such as dunking them in water and measuring their saturation points, user testing, etc. Lawyers present the results of their studies. The judge reads them, listens to arguments and makes a decision. __________________ create evolution

06-01-2003, 09:34 AM	#10 (permalink)
~springrain Banned Location: central USA	Good God... laughing... women don't give a SHIT about what an ad campaign says when it comes to buying tampons... i find the entire lawsuit frivolous and ridiculous... companies are constantly claiming to be "better", "superior", "new", "improved", etc. etc. etc... and anyone who has half a brian knows it all to be marketing BULLSHIT. not until there is "advertising reform" in this country, will any of this ever really change... and let's be real... we can't even figure out campaign reform, or even how to elect a president, let alone how to regulate advertising! trust me... when it comes to purchasing tampons... ads campaigns have about as much impact as a fart in a windstorm... at first... it's trial and error... then, you stick with whatever works best for you... period. (no pun intended) Last edited by ~springrain; 06-01-2003 at 09:56 AM..