L'Oreal USA acted properly in working toward discontinuance of in-store advertising regarding visuals of model's lashes, product performance claims related to eyelash length, volume, National Advertising Division rules; P&G issued initial complaint

Nevin Barich

RAMSEY, New Jersey , March 20, 2013 (Household and Personal Products Industry) – The National Advertising Division determined that L’Oreal USA acted properly in working toward the discontinuance of certain in-store advertising.

The advertising in question was challenged before NAD by The Procter & Gamble Company, a competing maker of mascaras.

P&G took issue with advertisements featuring visuals of model’s lashes and product performance claims related to eyelash length and volume. P&G asserted that the visuals were identical to those that appeared in Canada and the UK, together with a disclosure that stated “Lashes were enhanced in post-production.”

NAD is an investigative unit of the advertising industry’s system of self-regulation. It is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

Upon receiving NAD’s initial inquiry, the advertiser advised NAD that it had permanently discontinued all of the challenged print and broadcast advertisements prior to the challenge and affirmed that the in-store advertising would soon be replaced with new advertising.

NAD administratively closed the inquiry with regard to print and broadcast advertising because it lacks jurisdiction over claims that have been permanently discontinued prior to the commencement of an inquiry.

The in-store advertising at issue featured the same visuals as the print and broadcast ads, and, in certain instances, contained product performance claims. NAD noted its appreciation for the advertiser’s voluntary undertaking to permanently discontinue the advertisements, action NAD deemed necessary and proper.NAD cited a prior decision regarding mascara advertising that held P&G product demonstrations must be truthful and accurate and cannot be enhanced.

L’Oreal, in its advertiser’s statement, said the company “supports industry self-regulation and appreciates NAD's consideration of this matter.Although L’Oreal disagrees with the challenger's characterization of our advertising, we did not file a response on the merits because, as noted in NAD's decision, most of the advertising no longer was in use when the challenge was filed except for a few items that we already were in the process of updating.”

* All content is copyrighted by Industry Intelligence, or the original respective author or source. You may not recirculate, redistrubte or publish the analysis and presentation included in the service without Industry Intelligence's prior written consent. Please review our terms of use.