Negotiating the Boundary Between Marketing and 'Misleading Claims'
Manufacturers and retailers might best think twice about some of the health claims they make for food products as a result of the recent Federal Trade Commission settlement with the Dannon Company over deceptive advertising of its Activia and DanActive products. Dannon agreed to settle with the FTC and to pay $21 million dollars to 39 states to resolve their own inquiries while not admitting any wrongdoing. The FTC said in a press release that Dannon agreed to stop claiming that a daily serving of Activia relieves irregularity, and that DanActive helps people avoid colds or the flu.
According to the company, Dannon will continue to advertise the "core benefits" of these products, which are that Activia "helps to regulate the digestive system" and that DanActive "helps to support the immune system" but agreed to more clearly convey to consumers that the beneficial effects of Activia require consumers to eat three servings per day and that DanActive will not be marketed as a cold or flu remedy.
FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said, "These types of misleading claims are enough to give consumers indigestion." And, "Companies like Dannon shouldn't exaggerate the strength of scientific support for their products."
For manufacturers and retailers, this settlement may raise more questions than it provides answers. The monetary amount seems insignificant and these products with beneficial bacteria (probiotics) are still seen by most as "good for you” -- it's just a question of degree. Also, general opinion is not that consumers should eat less of the product -- in the case of Activia, it is being recommended that one should eat more to realize the benefit. But these are products that are known for their possible health benefits, and few people are presumably eating them primarily for their taste. So, if a dent is made in the armor of the health benefits claims, what kind of advertising message does that leave Dannon with going forward?
Discussion Questions: Where do you draw the line between marketing and misleading when it comes to health-oriented food products? Does too much "truthiness" leave marketers with nothing to work with? Do retailers need to take a second look at how they are marketing and promoting "healthy" products and categories in their stores?