ASCI upheld complaints against 145 ads out of 180 ads evaluated in Feb 2019

During the month of February 2019, ASCI investigated complaints against 243 advertisements, of which the advertisers ensured corrective action for 63 advertisements once they received the complaints from ASCI. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) of ASCI upheld complaints against 145 advertisements out of 180 advertisements evaluated by them. Of these, 145 advertisements, 83 belonged to the healthcare sector, 33 to the education sector, 10 to the food & beverages sector, 1 to personal care, and 18 were from the ‘others’ category. 

Amongst various advertisements that were examined, a significant number of advertisements were upheld for exaggeration of product efficacy and exploiting consumers’ lack of knowledge. This was followed by violations of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act (DMR Act). A large number of these advertisements were digital, that is, advertisers’ own websites carrying the objectionable claims and visuals. 

For the Food & Beverages sector, the CCC found a couple of well-known brands referring to Ayurvedic or herbal ingredients known for their memory enhancing properties; however, the associated claims were not substantiated. A popular cooking oil was making claims regarding the oil being “Lite” and “Less absorbent” without any robust technical support data. An A-2 cow milk brand was projecting its products to have some unique immunity benefits or miraculous effects that were not substantiated by any scientific rationale or clinical evidence. Additionally, a couple of brands were making improper use of the FSSAI logo, implying that the product has been tested/ approved/ endorsed by FSSAI. This was also in violation of the FSSAI advisory against such use which is not in the prescribed format. 

Shweta Purandare, Secretary General, ASCI, commented, “Over the last one year, in the Food and Beverage sector alone, ASCI’s Consumer Complaints Council examined over 300 advertisements for misleading claims. This was a result of the co-regulation model under which FSSAI had given ASCI a mandate for comprehensive Suo Motu surveillance of potentially misleading advertisements in print media and television. Such arrangement provides a win-win for stakeholders, wherein self-regulatory organisations ensure a better advertising ecosystem and the regulators can intervene only when necessary, thus bringing synergies in efficiency.” 

HEALTHCARE: Total of 83 advertisements complained against 

• Direct Complaints (58 advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (25 advertisements) 

EDUCATION: Total of 33 advertisements complained against 

• Direct Complaints (One advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (32advertisements) 

FOOD AND BEVERAGES: Total of 10 advertisements complained against 

• Direct Complaints (Four advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (Six advertisements) 

PERSONAL CARE: One advertisement complained against 

• Direct Complaints (One advertisement) 

OTHERS: - Total of 18 advertisements complained against 

• Direct Complaints (Eight advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (10 advertisements) 

Direct Complaints 

The advertisements given below were complained against by general public or by industry members. Of the 140 advertisements, 34 cases were informally resolved as the advertisers’ ensured prompt corrective action immediately post receiving the complaints. Complaints against 72 advertisements were upheld by the CCC. Of these 72 advertisements, 58 belonged to Healthcare sector, 4 belonged to the Food & Beverages sector, 1 belonged to the Education sector and Personal Care sector each, and 8 to the ‘Others’ category. 

Healthcare  

1. Sahajanand Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. (Joint Aid Oil and Joint Aid Spray): The advertisement’s claim, “Trusted by Doctors, Physiotherapists and Lakhs of families” is misleading. The second claim, “100% Natural” for Joint Aid Spray is false and misleading by ambiguity. Additionally, the claim, “Developed by DR” when seen in conjunction with the visual of a stethoscope, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. 

2. Lord Dhanvantari Ayurvedic Hospital: The advertisement (in Hindi), claiming cure of knee pain and joint pain by showing similar testimonials and same X-ray reports for two separate individual patients and claiming progress on first day of treatment, and treatment after three and six months. These claims were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and are misleading by gross exaggeration. 

The following 56 advertisements were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Magic Remedies (DMR) Act, when the advertisements were viewed in totality with the texts and visuals: The majority of these were advertiser websites carrying the objectionable claims. 

Food & Beverage 

1. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd (Parle Magix Biscuit): The TVC shows a kid dressed in the police uniform pulling the trigger and firing a bullet (through an audio cue) at the shopkeeper saying in angry tone “Koi bhi cream biscuit Magix ki jagah chipkaoge”. The humorous TVC, though not objectionable, manifests a dangerous practice, exploits the vulnerability of minors and more importantly, encourages minors to emulate the modus operandi of any crime. 

2. Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd (Amul Memory Milk-Tropical Fruit): The advertisement’s claims “Milk with goodness of Ayurveda” and “Contains various Ayurvedic herbs that are traditionally known to boost memory”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. 

3. Gemini Edibles & Fats India Pvt. Ltd. (Freedom Refined Sunflower Oil): The claims “Lite” and “Less Absorbent” were not substantiated by any technical data, test reports, scientific rationale, or comparative study reports and are misleading by exaggeration and implication. 

4. Nanophyto Wellness Pvt Limited. (Jumpstart Nutrition): The advertisement’s claim “Jumpstart is a milk drink which contains active plant compounds known to enhance concentration, immunity and overall growth”, was not substantiated with supporting data. 

Education 

1. Catapult Classes: The advertisement’s claims were not substantiated with supporting evidence and are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

Personal Care 

1. Marico Ltd - True Roots Botanical Hair Tonic: In the advertisement, celebrity Radhika Apte was featured endorsing the product with claims that were not adequately substantiated. While the product may cause darkening of grey hair by virtue of Kesh Ranjak ingredients, the claims were found to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. The graphic in the advertisement (TVC) and on the pack depicting grey hair turning black was considered to be a misrepresentation of actual product action. The advertisements were in violation of the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in advertising and ASCI Guidelines for disclaimers in advertising as the disclaimers in the TVC / YouTube advertisements were not in the same language as that of the voice over (Hindi).

Others      

1. One97 Communications Ltd (PayTM): The advertisement claimed, “Win up to Rs 100 crore of Gold. No KYC Needed. Assured Gold Back on First Transfer”. The claim of “No KYC Needed” is misleading by omission and ambiguity. The second claim “UPI money transfers on PAYTM - Win up to Rs 100 crore of Gold” was not substantiated as the advertiser did not provide evidence of the customers who have benefitted by the said offer, nor any details regarding the modality of the offer. The claim is misleading by omission that the offer is subject to terms and conditions and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. 

2. One97 Communications Ltd. (PayTM): The advertisement’s claim on their website “Rs 50,000 redeemable on purchase of diamond precious jewellery with diamond jewellery voucher worth Rs 50,000” was misleading by omission of additional terms and conditions of cashback offer. The CCC was of the opinion that the said terms and conditions should have been stated upfront in the advertisement. The website advertisement is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. 

3. Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt Ltd (Honda): The advertisement’s claim (in Tamil) , “0% interest”, was misleading by omission and failed to mention that the offer wassubject to 50% payment on purchase of the vehicle.  The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. 

4. Vivo Mobile India (Vivo V11 Pro): The advertisement’s the claim, “Dual Rear Camera with Dual Pixel Technology”, was not substantiated, and misleading by exaggeration. The advertiser did not provide any technical data or test reports for Vivo V11 Pro having feature of dual rear camera with good picture quality. 

5. Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited (Mi LED Smart TV 4A Pro 49): The website advertisement’s claims, “700,000 hours of content on Patchwall” and “7,00,000+ hours of content” were misleading by omission and implication, that it is accessible free of charge. The product feature offering 700,000 hours of content should have been highlighted as chargeable.
6. VMware Software India Pvt. Ltd. (VMware): The print advertisement shows the visual of a driver and the front seat passenger without seat belts. The advertisement violates Central Motor Vehicle Rules 1989 and also promotes an unsafe and a dangerous practice, which manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. 

7. CTC Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd: The advertisement’s claims “World’s Largest Paper Mill Bearing Distributors” and “World’s Largest Heavy Bearing Distributors” were not substantiated and were misleading by gross exaggeration. 

8. Zydus Wellness Ltd: The advertisement’s claim, “Twaacha ki gehraai ke tan ghatane mein help kare aur skin ko banaye bright”, (“Helps remove tan from deep in the skin and makes skin bright”), was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. 

Suo Motu surveillance by ASCI for misleading advertisements 

The advertisements given below were picked up through ASCI’s Suo Motu surveillance of Print and TV media via the National Advertisement Monitoring Services (NAMS) project. Out of 103 advertisements that were picked, 29 cases were informally resolved, wherein the advertisers promptly confirmed that the advertisement are being withdrawn immediately post receiving the complaints. Of the 103 advertisements, complaints against 73 advertisements were upheld. Of these 73 advertisements, 32 belonged to the Education sector, 25 advertisements belonged to the Healthcare sector, 6 belonged to the Food & Beverages sector and 10 belonged to the ‘Others’ category. 

Education 

The CCC found that the claims made in following 5 advertisements were misleading claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisements were found to be in violation of ASCI Guidelines for Advertising for Educational Institutions:

Bhodhayan Coaching, Vidyapeeth Defence & Sports Academy, Reverberation Films Pvt Ltd (Removes acting studio), The Shri Ram Universal School, Angel’s Paradise. 

Complaints against advertisements of 27 educational institutes listed below are upheld mainly because of unsubstantiated claims AND/OR misleading claims that they provide 100% placement/ 100% placement assistance AND/OR they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields:

Sharanya Narayani International School, Central Technology Training Foundation, Eager Education & Charitable Trust- Eager Training Institute, iRise Academy for Competitive Exams, Ratnam Coaching Centre, Sagar Institute of Research & Technology, Shankar IAS Academy, Gurukul Classes, Amar Paramedical College, Sri Bhavana Para Medical College, Mekapati Rajamohan Reddy Institute of Technology and Science, Management Development Institute, Drona Kids, Elite Academy, Mahatma Jyoti Rao Phoole University, Shivalik School, Agra Career Point, Flying Turtle Studio, Liberty Career Academy, Beacon Education, Krishnaben Mukeshbhai Jani College of Nursing, Matha College of Nursing/ Matha School of Nursing, Anurag Dixit’s Musicology School of Music & Performing Arts, New King’s Academy, R.K Group of Institutions (R. K School of Nursing & Paramedical), Sagar Public School, Spice Air Academy 

Healthcare 

Complaints against the following 11 advertisements are upheld primarily due to unsubstantiated claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and could lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers:

Bharat Vikas Parishad Hospital & Research Centre, Sadana Fracture Centre, Sri Siddhivinayak Hospital, Shankar Pharmacy (Amrita Bindu), Arogya Niketan Sansthan & Research Center, Dr Dev Slimming Clinic, La Botanique International (Hca Gold Capsules), Mother Tincture/ Anti-Addiction Liquid, Herbal Creations – (Herbo Gold Tulsi Power), Queen’s NRI Hospital, Rana Hospital 

The following 14 advertisements were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Magic Remedies (DMR) Act when the advertisement was viewed in totality with the texts and visuals: 

Food & Beverage: 

Arputham Aqua (Arputham Aqua Mineral Water), Amour Nutrition Ultra-Premium 100% Whey Protein-Chocolate (Nature Identical Flavors), Mallekan Dairy and Agro Pvt Ltd (Dairylac-A2 Desi Cow Milk), Sri Selvamathi Idly Factory (Sri Ammu Idly Dosai Batter), Krishndev Dairy Farm (A2 Gir Cow Milk), Dr. Food & Banatone Industries 

Others 

The CCC found that the claims in following 10 advertisements were misleading and exploited consumers’ lack of knowledge leading to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers: 

1. Voltas Limited (Refrigerator): The advertisement’s claim, “Vegetables remain Fresh even after 30 days” was inadequately substantiated, and is misleading by exaggeration. Additionally, the hold duration of the disclaimers in the TVC contravened Clause 4 (X) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. 

2. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd (Quickerala.com): The advertisement’s claims, Kerala’s Largest Online Business Directory”, “Kerala’s Largest Business/Service Search Website”, and “Kerala’s Largest Business listing website”, were not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data and are misleading by exaggeration. 

3. TCL Communication (BlackBerry Key 2/ BlackBerry Evolve): The advertisement’s claim, “Most secure android smart phone”, was not substantiated with comparative data and is misleading by exaggeration. 

4. Anand Enterprises: The advertisement’s claim, “India's No.1 Manufacturer & Supplier of Cabinet chargers”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data. 

5. R. Builders & Developers Rameshwaram Residency: The advertisement’s claim, “Rameshwaram Residency of L.R. Builders & Developers has become best project of Rajasthan.” was not substantiated with any market survey data or verifiable comparative data. 

6. Madhuram Mini Mall (MM3): The advertisement’s claim,“Kota's No.1 Food Court from all over India”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data. 

7. Ramnivash & Company (Ramnivash Range of Products): The advertisement’s claim, “Best product of Bangalore” was not substantiated with any market survey data or any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s agarbathi products and other agarbathi brands in Bangalore. 

8. Sauss Home Products Pvt. Ltd (Pooja white Detergent Cake and Powder): The advertisement’s claim, “First choice of Indian housewives”, was not substantiated with any market research data, or verifiable comparative data and is misleading by exaggeration. 

9. Singhania Buildcon Pvt. Ltd (Harshit Harmony): The advertisement’s claim, “Chhattisgarh’s No.1 Real Estate Company”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data. 

Motia Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Motia’s Royal Citi): The advertisement’s claim, “Awarded as Greenest Society” was considered to be vague as the context of the claim was not provided.