In this era of social media and crowdsourced reviews, businesses with happy customers do what they can to publicize positive feedback. But if a company compensates customers for reviews and fails to disclose that tit-for-tat relationship, it’s illegal and deceptive marketing. [More]
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau continued its ongoing crackdown of companies deceptively marketing products to U.S. veterans by ordering NewDay Financial, LLC to pay $2 million and revamp its business practices. [More]
Turn on your TV today and maybe you’ll see an iPhone ad with Jimmy Fallon followed by 30 seconds of Matthew McConaughey giving his personal philosophy on Lincoln automobiles. To many of us, it’s all part of the endless parade of familiar faces and voices being paid to sell us something, but there’s an important legal distinction between a celebrity who endorses a product they claim to believe in and one who is just picking up a paycheck to appear in an ad. [More]
Both Oregon and Washington State filed lawsuits against the makers of 5-Hour Energy, alleging that the company has engaged in deceptive advertising tied to the ingredients in its drink. Other states are expected to follow suit, pun intended and totally appropriate in this case. [More]
Company To Refund Consumers $3.5M Because Cactus Juice Isn’t “Inflammation Relief Without A Prescription”
Advertisements featuring carefree, beautiful smiling people sipping on juice might not be enough to entice someone to buy a product, but plastering claims that the drink is a cure-all for pain could probably do the trick. But when those promises aren’t supported by, you know, actual science, then it’s called deceptive and federal regulators won’t stand for that. [More]
Put down that shaker of Sensa. Those promises of shedding 30 pounds while eating french fries and sitting on the couch aren’t real. We know — who would have thunk it? Well, the Federal Trade Commission for starters, which announced today that four marketers of fad weight loss products settled FTC charges on deceptive advertising for $34 million. [More]
Last month, we pointed out that while T-Mobile’s new pricing schemes are a lot better than the standard handset subsidy/contract model in the United States, it’s not perfect, and it’s not totally commitment- and contract-free. The Attorney General of Washington state agrees with us. They got T-Mobile sign a court order that applies nationwide and lets customers get a full refund on their handsets and plans if they believe that they were misled into signing up with T-Mobile. [More]
United and US Airways will soon charge an extra $5 to check bags at the airport, charging $20 for the first bag and $30 for the second. Since it will still cost $15 and $25 respectively to pay for checked bags online, United thinks they can herald the chance to “prepay & save!,” while US Airways boasts that they now have a “lower fee online!”
Subway spokesman and occasional thin guy Jared Fogle may soon be out of work thanks to a new FTC rule banning commercial testimonials that warn “results not typical” or “individual results may vary.” Under the new rule, marketers using, say, body builders to advertise weight loss pills are also going to have to show an average lardass whose results might be more typical. You can guess how advertisers are reacting to the change…
Andrew sent us this picture of a CampusTechShop ad that he says is all over his college campus. The ad trumpets reduced prices on the previous edition of MacBook Pro, then illustrates it with a picture of the new MacBook Pro.
Here’s a more complete copy of the questionable Linens n’ Things ad we wondered about yesterday. Click to expand.