J&J, P&G Cited By UK Advertising Standards Authority For Misleading Ads

Due to the improper use of makeup in "before" and "after" photos and the digital modification of a model's skin, the U.K.'s Advertising Standards Authority recently deemed advertising from two leading U.S. personal-care firms to be misleading.

The ads - for Johnson & Johnson's Clean & Clear and Procter & Gamble's Olay - are now no longer in use in the country.

The publication of rulings against two leaders in the personal-care industry - P&G's in the closing weeks of 2009 and J&J's in the first week of 2010 - was not to send a message but is merely coincidental, an ASA rep told "The Rose Sheet" in an e-mail.

"ASA's recent adjudications involving personal care firms do not signal a conscious decision by us to scrutinize advertisements in this sector more closely than before," he said. "Although we do pro-actively monitor ads across sectors and media on a regular basis, we have not specially focused our compliance checks on ads by personal-care firms."

J&J's television ad for Clean & Clear Spot Control Kit - called Clean & Clear Advantage Acne Control Kit in the U.S. - featured testimonials and before-and-after photos of young women who have tried the product, as well as a voice-over extolling the benefits of the kit.

Two issues were raised by consumers and ASA - whether the "after" images were representative of the results that can be achieved by using the products and whether results from a clinical study the firm conducted were accurately characterized in the ad.

While makeup was removed from the women's skin before the "before" and "after" photos, J&J said a light powder was applied to their skin prior to the "after" photos to "ensure the shininess did not detract from the results on the improved clarity of skin."

For the comparison to be fair, both photos should have been taken under the same conditions, ASA concluded, determining the ad was in violation of the Committee of Advertising Practice's broadcast code regulations for misleading advertising.

As for the clinical study issue, a voice-over in the commercial says "a clinical study showed 100 percent of people had improvement in just one day. After four weeks, they all had fewer spots, reduced redness and much clearer skin."

After examining J&J's explanation and data the firm supplied, ASA determined that evidence from the study did show improvement after one day of use and the claim was therefore unlikely to mislead consumers.

However, ASA ruled the ad in question may not appear again in the same format, on account of the before-and-after photos.

The Clean & Clear Advantage Acne Control Kit includes Acne Control Cleanser, Acne Control Moisturizer and Fast Clearing Spot Treatment; it retails for $19.99.

Public Takes Issue With Twiggy Photo

In December, ASA focused on a P&G magazine ad for Olay Definity Eye Illuminator featuring a retouched image of 60-year-old British model Twiggy.

More than 700 people had complained about the ad through a Web site campaign, according to ASA.

In its response to ASA's inquiry, P&G maintained that it is routine practice at a photo shoot to use cosmetics, hair styling and lighting as well as "post-production techniques to correct ... minor photographic deficiencies."

The firm acknowledged that the area around Twiggy's eyes was retouched in a version of the ad - a move inconsistent with P&G's internal policies - and withdrew the ad, replacing it with an untouched version.

ASA approved of that decision, noting that the original ad could "give consumers a misleading impression of the effect the product could achieve" due to the retouching, references to "younger-looking eyes" and use of a wrinkle-reduction claim.

The ad violated the misleading advertising clause in the Committee of Advertising Practice non-broadcast code but did not breach a social responsibility regulation as the image was not likely to negatively impact "perceptions of body image" in the product's target demographic, ASA said.

No further action was required of P&G.

Olay Definity Eye Illuminator retails in the U.S. for $23.39.

Most U.K. Beauty Ads Comply, ASA Says

ASA says that on the whole, health and beauty firms tend to comply with U.K. advertising regulations.

A November survey found that 95.1 percent of health and beauty ads are in compliance, even though the segment receives the fifth most complaints, ASA notes.

The numbers are an improvement from 2006 - the last time the survey was conducted - when only 90.5 percent of ads complied.

Ads were found non-compliant due to lack of scientific evidence to back up claims, exaggerated claims, misleading and unauthorized medicinal claims.

"Encouragingly the survey suggests the sector is by and large adhering to the rules," ASA Chief Executive Guy Parker says in a release.

"Nonetheless, the ASA will continue to tackle ads that make unsubstantiated or irresponsible claims in order to continue the good progress that has been made," he adds.

Health and beauty sector ads account for a small proportion of complaints, according to an ASA spokesman.

- Lauren Nardella ( ¹ [email protected] )