You are here
Home > Advertising > ASCI Upholds Complaints Against 143 Advertisements Out Of 260

ASCI Upholds Complaints Against 143 Advertisements Out Of 260

Abanti-Sankaranarayan

In May 2018, ASCI’s Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) upheld complaints against 143 advertisements out of the total of 260 advertisements that were evaluated by the CCC. Of these 143 advertisements against which complaints were upheld, 42 belonged to the healthcaresector, 61 to the education sector, 15 to the food & beverages category, 10 to the personalcare and 15 were from the ‘others’ category.
A total of 140 advertisements were picked up by ASCI’s suo moto surveillance, wherein 33 cases were informally resolved as advertisements were voluntarily withdrawn and objections against 106 advertisements were upheld. Of the 120 advertisements complained against by the general public or by industry members, 17 cases were informally resolved where in the advertisements we revoluntarily withdrawn and complaints against 37 advertisements were upheld by the CCC.
The most common reason for upholding complaints was exaggeration of product efficacy. This was followed by violations of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act (DMR Act) and the Drugs and Cosmetics (D&C) Rules and advertisements which contravened various ASCI guidelines. The other reasons included providing facts and figures which were inadequate to substantiate claims, improper use of the FSSAI logo, exploiting consumers’ lack of knowledge, claims which were misleading by ambiguity or by implication.
Among the various complaints against advertisements, the CCC observed that celebrities endorsed unsafe practices as seen in case of prominent beverage companies and for a mosquito repellent product. Such depiction may influence minors to emulate such acts. Celebrities also endorsed misleading claims in the product category of hair oil, shampoo, innerwear and audio speakers. These advertisements contravened ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising. Advertisements by a well-known homeopathy practitioner were misleading exploiting consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
“ASCI is working closely with various Government bodies to establish an effective and transparent self‐ regulation code for the advertising industry, which upholds the highest professional and ethical standards. ASCI prides itself on its impressive track record of effectively and expeditiously disposing of consumer complaints against misleading advertisements, thereby giving form to the rights conferred upon consumers to protect them from deceptive advertisements.” said Abanti Sankaranarayanan, Chairman, ASCI

HEALTHCARE:‐Totalof42advertisementscomplainedagainst

• DirectComplaints(Sixadvertisementscomplainedagainst)
• SuoMotoSurveillancebyASCI(36advertisementscomplained against)

PERSONALCARE:‐Totalof10advertisementscomplainedagainst

• DirectComplaints(Eightadvertisementscomplainedagainst)
• SuoMotoSurveillancebyASCI(Twoadvertisementscomplainedagainst)

FOOD AND BEVERAGES: ‐Totalof 15 advertisementscomplainedagainst

• Direct Complaints (Seven advertisements complained against)
• Suo Moto Surveillance by ASCI (Eight advertisements complained against)

EDUCATION: ‐Totalof61 advertisementscomplainedagainst

• DirectComplaints(Eightadvertisementscomplainedagainst)
• SuoMotoSurveillanceby ASCI(53advertisementscomplained against)

OTHERS: ‐Totalof15advertisementscomplainedagainst

• DirectComplaints(Eight advertisementscomplainedagainst)
• SuoMotoSurveillancebyASCI(Sevenadvertisementscomplainedagainst)

DIRECTCOMPLAINTS

The advertisements given below were complained against by the general public or by industry members. Complaints against the following three advertisements were upheld as the advertisements violated Chapter III (Against harmful situations) of the ASCI Code.

ThebelowadvertisementsviolatedChapterIII(UnsafePractices)ofASCICode:

1. PepsiCoIndia –Pepsi: In the television advertisement, the visual showing the protagonist running on the platform in particular, shows a dangerous practice that may influence minors to emulate suchacts. This manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence.

2. The Coca‐Cola India PvtLtd‐ Limca: In the television advertisement, the visual of the protagonist along with his friends falling from a human pyramid from the height of second floor of the building and falling on to the ground which turn sin to a pool cannot be considered as hyperbole. The actions shown manifest disregard for safety and encourage negligence and may influence minors to emulate suchacts.

3. Sree Muralikrishna Soap Works (JIL Washing Powder and Soap): In the advertisement, the specific visual showing the wife putting her husband in the washing machine was dangerous and had the potential of encouraging the children to imitate suchacts, which could be life‐ threatening. Regardless of the disclaimer, this acts how ninth TVC encourages dangerous practices, manifests disregard for safety and encourages negligence.

Out of 120 advertisements, 37 advertisements were considered to be misleading. Of the total of 37 advertisements, eight advertisements belonged to the Personal Care category, eight to Education category, seven belonged to the Food & Beverages category, six advertisements belonged to healthcare category, and eight belonged to the ‘Others’ category.

PERSONAL CARE: ‐

1. HindustanUnileverLimited(PureDermAntiDandruffShampoo):The advertisement’s claim, “Wash your hair every day with PURE DERM, dandruff goes and won’t come back” endorsed by AnushkaSharma is an absolute claim and was not adequately substantiated. The claim was misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also contravened the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in advertising put forth by ASCI. The advertiser did not furnish any evidence of the consent of the celebrity for the above mentioned claim, hence it was concluded that the print advertisement was in contravention of the Guidelines for Celebrities in advertising.

2. Colgate‐Palmolive (India)Limited‐ColgateHerbalNaturalToothpaste:Theadvertisement’s claim,“Naturaltoothpaste”wasnotsubstantiated andismisleadingbyimplication.Theclaim exploitsconsumers’ lackofknowledge andislikelytoleadtograveorwidespread disappointmentinthemindsofconsumers.

3. MaricoLtd.(NiharShantiBadamAmlaHairOil):Intheadvertisement,celebrityVidyaBalanclaimsthatNiharShantiAmlahasthegoodnessofbadam(almonds)whichgivesblack,silkyhair. Theadvertisementismisleadingbyambiguityandimplicationbecausethereappearstobea contextualcomparisonwithamlaoilbutthereisnosubstantiationsuperiorityoveramla,nor doestheconsumer studyindicatesuperiority ofthe product tootheroils.Theclaimalsoattributes the benefitofblacksilkyhairto“goodnessofbadam”whichwasnotsubstantiated.Theclaimis misleading byambiguityandimplication thatalmondcontentintheoilisresponsible forblack hair andnotjustpresenceofAmla.Theadvertisement contravenedASCIGuidelinesforCelebritiesinAdvertising.

4. CosmosOnlinePvtLtd(Gizmobaba Laserpowergrowcomb):Theclaimsmadeinthe advertisement,“TheGizmobabalaser comb provideslow‐level laserlightenergy thatstimulates andenlivenshairfolliclespromoting newhairgrowth”, “Withconsistent use,mostusersstart seeingbenefitsin16 weeks(Basedon clinicalstudies)”and“Stopshair loss and makeshairgrow thickerstrongerandhealthier” werenotsubstantiated.Theclaims are misleading andlikelytolead tograveorwidespreaddisappointmentinthemindsofconsumers.

5. RenovisionExportsPvtLtd.(OrthovitOilandCapsules):Theadvertisement’sclaims,“Stiffness inmuscles,jointpain,arthritis,gout,hand‐leg pain,whatever thepain,themosteffective medicineofeverypain”and“Nowsaybyetoeverypain”,werenotsubstantiated. Theclaims weremisleadingbyexaggerationandimplicationthatOrthovitOilandCapsulesarebetterthan allotherpainreliefmedicines.

6. PrincePharma(2MuchBreastCream):Theadvertisement’s claims,“Ayurvedicmedicated Cream”and“Fortwo‐foldeffectuseitalongwith2muchbeautycapsule,”wereconsidered to be,primafacie,incontraventionofDrugsandMagicRemedies(DMR)Act.

7. IncNutDigitalPvtLtd(AmairaAyurvedicHairGrowthOil):Theadvertisement’sclaim,“India’s first100%Ayurvedichairgrowthoilwith12organicherbs”,wasnotsubstantiated andis misleadingbyexaggeration.Theclaim“Itismadewith auniqueAyurvedicformulation”was not substantiated.

8. SarinaHerbalPvtLtd(ZulfrajHairOilandShampoo):Theadvertisement’sclaims,“Adopt ZulfRajwithdoubleaction madeupof17pureherbs”, “OnlyZulfRajhasthatquality whichnot onlyendshairproblemsbut alsoensuresyouto nothavethe samehair problemeverby making hairstrong,thickandsoft”,werenotsubstantiated withtechnicalrationaleorproductefficacy data;theclaimsaremisleadingbyexaggeration.

EDUCATION: ‐

1. LegalEdgeTutorials:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“UndisputedKingofCLATCoachinginIndia” wasnotsubstantiatedwithsupportingdatatoproveits leadershippositioninIndiaascompared tootherCLATcoachingclasses;theclaimis misleadingbyexaggeration.

2. Think&LearnPvtLtd(Byju’s–TheLearningApp):Theadvertisement’s claims,“One Crore (1,00,00,000) studentsarelearningfromBYJU’s‐TheLearningApp”,“600Memberstrong Research&Development teamisinvolvedincreatingthebestlearningprogramforstudents”, “93%parentsreported anoverallincreaseintheirchildren’s gradesafterusingBYJU’s”,“90% studentrenewtheirBYJU’scourseyearonyear”and“51minutesspentontheapponan averagebyastudenteveryday”werenotadequatelysubstantiated andaremisleadingby exaggeration

3. BennettColeman&CoLtd(BennettUniversity):Theadvertisement’sclaim“LeadingChange for175+ years1838‐2017”appearingwithouta clear linkand referencetothe TimesofIndiaGroup ismisleadingby ambiguityandimplication.

4. BITTPolytechnic:Theadvertisement’s claims,“BestCollegeoftheYear–2018”and“Best PolytechnicCollegeinIndia–2018”,wereinadequatelysubstantiated toprovethatitisbetter thantherestofthecollegesinIndia. Theclaimsdonotmentionthesourceanddateof researchandaremisleadingbyomission.

5. JetOverseasPrivateLimited:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“CanadaPermit+PersonalResidency expense‐25,000/‐ “100%JobandPermit”and“StudentVisawithoutIELTS.”werenot substantiatedwithanyverifiableevidence.Theclaimsaremisleadingbyexaggeration.

6. MadeEasyGroup(NEXTIAS):Theadvertisement’sclaim,“268selectionsintheUPSCcivil servicesexam”intheadvertisementwasnotsubstantiatedandismisleadingbyexaggeration.

7. Schoolof IndianHotelManagement:The advertisement’sclaims,“100%Placementtilldate”(in English),and“AssuredJobwithwrittenguarantee”,(inBengaliastranslatedinEnglish),were not substantiatedwithauthenticsupportingdatasuchasdetailedlistofstudents, whohave been placedthroughtheirInstituteinHotel Industry,contactdetailsofstudentsforverification, enrolmentformsandappointmentlettersreceivedbythestudents,noranyindependent audit orverificationcertificate,and aremisleadingbyexaggeration.

8. CapableWorkforce–BharatSevakSamaj:Theadvertisermaybeprovidingjobassistanceto theirstudents, theuseof100%numerical isnotrelevantfor“jobassistance”claim. Theuseof “100%”asadescriptorintheclaimismisleadingbyimplication,andexploitstheconsumers’ lackofknowledgeandislikelytoleadtograveorwidespreaddisappointmentinthemindsof consumers.

FOOD AND BEVERAGES: ‐

1. ShreeBaidyanathAyurvedBhawanPvtLtd.(BaidyanathKesariKalp):Theadvertisement’s claims,“GrowYounger, StayYoung”and“Nowdoublepowerwithdryfruits”,werenot substantiated.Theclaimsaremisleadingbyexaggeration.

2. PEPSICOINDIAHOLDINGSP.LTD‐QuakerOats:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“QuakerOatsme hai“2XMOREPROTEIN ANDFIBRE”seekstomisleadconsumers intobelievingthat2xprotein andfibreistrueasagainstotheroats,thedisclaimerstatesthatthecomparisonisclearly againstcornflakes.Thecorresponding disclaimer“*Perservecomparisonwithcornflakes. Reference: AtlasofIndianFoods”wasnotlegibleandnotasperASCIGuidelines ondisclaimers (fontsize,contrast,holdduration).Theclaimwasmisleadingbyambiguityandimplication.

3. CrownBeersIndiaPrivateLimited:Intheadvertisement,theclaim“BudweiserExperiences” wassurrogateforanalcoholbrand.TheCharteredAccountant’sCertificateshowsthatdatais onlyforpromotionalactivitybygivingturnoveroftwoindependent eventagencies,andcould not satisfy whether this turnover is also marketed as aBudweiser Experience. The advertisement wasasurrogateadvertisement forBudweiserbeerandinIndiaBudweiseris alwaysidentifiedwithbeer.

4. DaburIndiaLtd(DaburHoney):Theadvertisement’sclaimbytheprotagonist(newlymarried lady)abouthoneyandwaterinpreventing/reducingweightgaincouldmisleadbothobeseand non‐obeseconsumersbyambiguityandimplication.

5. TataChemicals Limited(TataRockSalt):Theadvertisement’sclaim,“Addafewcrystals ofrock salttoyourlassitocurestomachailmentsandhelpindeworming”,wasnotsubstantiatedwith anyclinicalevidence.Whenseeninconjunction withtheclaim“Alsokeepsyouinthebestof health”,theclaimimplyingcureforstomachailmentsbesidesbeingnotpermissibleforanyfood product,itismisleadingbyexaggerationandexploitsconsumers’lackofknowledgeandislikely toleadtograveorwidespreaddisappointmentinthemindsofconsumers.

HEALTHCARE:

TheCCCfoundclaimsofsixadvertisements inhealthcareproductsorservicestobeeither misleadingorfalse ornotadequately/scientificallysubstantiated;hence in violationof theASCI Code.Complaintsagainstthefollowingadvertisementswereupheld.

1. Dr.DetoxWeightLossClinic:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“AdvancedWeightloss(Uptosixto eightkilograms/month)”,and“ADestination ofnatural&easywayforloseweight&body detox”,werenotsubstantiated withsupportingclinicalevidence,andwithtreatmentefficacy data,andaremisleadingbyexaggeration.

2. PrincePharma/2MuchGold:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“Anultimateayurvedicsolutionfor all sexual problems” and “Being specially blended with choicest herbs, rejuvenators &stimulants,itproducesbestresultsinnervousstrain,neurasthenia,impairedvitality,chronic mentalandphysicalexhaustion andconditions ofweakness duetoorganictroublesafter thoughtless excessindulgence insexualactivity,generallassitude,worriedness, mentalsomatic debility,nervousdyspepsia,insomnia,lossofenergy,premature oldage&pre‐mature ejaculation”wereconsideredtobe,primafacie,incontraventionofDrugsAndMagicRemedies (DMR)Act.

3. LunaPharma/Stonecure:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“KidneyStone?Curewithoutoperation, getinstantreliefwithmedicine”,“Recognised formula”,and“100%benefit”consideredtobe, primafacie,inviolationofTheDrugs&MagicRemedies(DMR)Act

4. NaturalCare: Theadvertisement’sclaim,“Herbscanhelpcuremostofthediseasesranging fromcommon coldtocancer,asthma,arthritis, baldness, diabetes, skindisease,autoimmune disease,etc.beitchronicoracute,herbscanhelpcurethemandthattoowithoutusingthe knife, was considered to be primafacie,incontraventionofDrugsAndMagicRemedies (DMR) Act

5. BeautNHea:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“Removeyourbody’sexcessfatthroughtheworld’s besttechnology” and“Withoutsurgery,withoutsideeffects,onlythreetofoursessionsa month”werenotsubstantiatedwithevidenceofproductefficacyandtheclaimsaremisleading.

6. ShathayuAyurveda: The advertisement’s claim implying cure for migraine was not substantiated withanyscientificrationaleorclinicalevidence. Thetestimonialinthe advertisementismisleadingbyexaggerationandexploitsconsumers’lackofknowledge.

OTHERS: ‐

1. SonalikaInternationalTractorsLimited:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“India’sNo.1Tractor”, “World’sNo.1plantcapacity”, “No.1infourcountries” and“No.1farmer’s choice”werenot substantiatedwithsupportingdata.Theclaimsaremisleadingbyexaggeration.

2. OrrisInfrastructurePrivateLimited(OrrisAsterCourtPremier):Theadvertisement’sclaim,‘200%money‐backin caseofnopossession’and ‘GetRs.20,000till possession’,were not substantiatedandaremisleadingbyexaggeration.

3. LuxIndustriesLimited(LuxVenusInnerwear):TheadvertisementfeaturescelebrityAmitabh Bachchanusingtheterminology“Firstchoiceofsuperhero”connotesacelebrity endorsement. Theclaims“Firstchoiceofsuperstars”and“Doesnotgetlooseanddoesnottearsoon”were notsubstantiated andaremisleadingbyexaggeration whichcanleadtowidespread disappointment inthemindsofconsumers.TheprintadvertisementcontravenedASCI GuidelinesforCelebritiesinAdvertising.

4. ElicaPBIndiaPrivateLimited(ElicaChimney): Theadvertisement’sclaim,“TheWorld’sNo.1 ChimneyCompany”wasinadequatelysubstantiatedandismisleadingbyambiguity,omission andimplication.

5. WhirlpoolofIndiaLtd.(Whirlpool3DInverterAC):Theadvertisement’s claim,“40%faster cooling”wassubstantiated.However,theclaimismisleadingbyomissionofmentionofthe basisofcomparison. Thefontsizeandthepositioningofthedisclaimerqualifyingtheclaim werenotincompliancewiththeASCIGuidelinesforDisclaimers.

5. KAFFAppliances(India)PrivateLimited(KAFFKitchenAppliances):Theadvertisement’sclaim, “World’sbestqualitykitchenappliances”, wasnotsubstantiated withcomparative dataofthe advertiser’sproductswithotherkitchenappliancesofleadingmarketplayersworldwide,for claimingtheirproductstobeofbestquality,andis misleadingbyexaggeration.

7. ReckittBenckiser (India)PrivateLimited (MorteinInstaTulsi):ThevisualsintheTVCveryclearlydepicttulsileavesfloatingwith thegreenvapoursemanating fromthevaporizerandfrontofpackvisualsintheTVCshowsa mosquitogettingsquishedona bed offivetulsileaves.Thefrontofpackpanelhasnoreference toabsenceoftulsiintheproductandonlymentions InstaTulsi. Suchdepictionismisleading by ambiguityandimplication. Inthecontextofaninsectrepellentproduct,whichwouldgenerally haveinstructions toavoiddirectinhalationordirectexposuretotheproduct,showingsucha visualofacelebrityinhaling theproductshowsadangerous practice thatmayinfluence minors toimitate suchacts,manifestsadisregard forsafetyandencouragesnegligence.Theadvertisement contravenedGuidelinesforCelebritiesinadvertising.

SUOMOTOSurveillancebyASCI

Theadvertisements givenbelowwerepickedupthroughASCI’sSuoMotosurveillanceofPrintandTV mediaviatheNationalAdvertisement MonitoringServices(NAMS)project.Outof140advertisements thatwerepickedup,106 advertisements wereconsideredtobemisleading.Ofthetotalof106advertisements, 53belongedtotheEducationcategory, 36advertisements belongedtotheHealthcarecategory,eightbelongedtotheFood&Beveragescategory, twotoPersonalCare category,and seven belongedtothe‘Others’category.

EDUCATION: ‐

TheCCCfoundfollowingclaimsintheadvertisementsby14advertisersthatwerenotsubstantiated andthus,inviolationofASCIGuidelinesforAdvertisingforEducationalInstitutions.

1. BanasthaliVidyapith:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“BanasthaliVidyapithistheworld’slargest fullyresidentialuniversityforwomen”,wasinadequately substantiated andismisleadingby exaggeration.

2. BragnamPreSchool:Theadvertisement’s claim,“BestPreschoolforKidsinIndia”,wasnot substantiated withanyverifiablecomparative dataoftheadvertiser’sinstituteandsimilar preschools forkidsinIndiatoprovethatitisbetterthantherest,orthroughanindependent thirdpartyvalidation.Theclaimismisleading byexaggerationandexploitsconsumers’ lackof knowledgeandislikelytoleadtograveorwidespreaddisappointment inthemindsof consumers.

3. MGM Public School: The advertisement’s claim, “Central India’s Most Trusted Name in Education”ismisleadingbyexaggerationandexploitsconsumers’lack ofknowledgeandislikely toleadtograveorwidespreaddisappointmentinthemindsofconsumers.

4. MindseedPreSchool:Theadvertisement’s claim,“AwardedIndia’sBestPre‐School”,was inadequatelysubstantiatedandismisleadingbyexaggerationandomissionofthesourceforthe claim.

6. YaduvanshiShikshaNiketan: Theadvertisement’s claim,“India’sfirstschooltogivethe maximum/highestnumberofselectioninIIT,Medical,NDA, NTSE,VVM.” wasnotsubstantiated withanyverifiablecomparative dataoftheadvertiser’s instituteandothersimilarinstitutesin thesamecategory,noranyindependent auditorverificationcertificatetoprovehighest selectionsandtheclaimis misleadingbyexaggeration.

6. RaoIITAcademy:Theadvertisement’s claim,“Scholarshipworth10crores.”wasnot substantiatedwithanyevidenceofsuchscholarships beingprovidedorthefinancialprovision madebytheadvertiserforthesame.Theclaimismisleadingbyexaggeration.

7. Zee Interactive Learning System ‐ KidzeePre School: The advertisement’s claim, “India’s favouritepre‐school”wasnotsubstantiatedwithverifiablecomparativedata/marketsurvey dataoftheadvertiser’sinstitute andothersimilarinstitutes,orthroughathirdpartyvalidation, andismisleadingbyexaggeration.

8. TaxilaBusinessSchool:Theadvertisement’s claim,“Minimumplacement12lakh”,wasnot substantiated withauthenticsupportingdatasuchasdetailedlistofstudents,whohavebeen placedthroughtheirInstitutewiththeminimumstatedsalaryof12.0lakhs.Theadvertiser did notprovideanydatasuchascontactdetailsofstudentsforverification, enrolmentformsand appointment lettersreceivedbythestudents,noranyindependentauditorverification certificate.Theclaimismisleadingbyexaggeration.

9. ScottishInternationalSchool:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“Parent’smostfavouriteschool”was notsubstantiatedwithverifiablecomparativedata/marketsurveydataoftheadvertiser’sschoolandothersimilarschools,orthroughathirdpartyvalidation. Theclaimismisleading by exaggeration.

10.ShemrockandShemfordGroupofSchools(ShemfordFuturisticSchool):Theadvertisement’s claim,“India’sfastestgrowingschoolchain”wasnotsubstantiated withverifiablecomparative data/marketsurveydataoftheadvertiser’sschoolchainandothersimilarschoolchains,or throughathirdpartyvalidation.Theclaimismisleadingbyexaggeration.

11.AakashEducationalServicesLtd (AakashMedicalIIT‐JEEFoundation):Theadvertisement’s claim,“Upto100%scholarship”,wasnotsubstantiated andtheclaimwasmisleadingby ambiguityandomission.Theadvertisement contravenedtheGuidelinesforAdvertisingof EducationalInstitutionsandPrograms

12. KnowledgeStationIndiaPrivateLimited‐(TheSantaKidz): The davThe advertisement’s claim, “India’s 1st Brain school was not substantiated with any verifiable credible evidence, or through a third party validation. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration

13.DeekshaClassesPrivateLimited: Theadvertisement’sclaim,“770Deekshainsbecamedoctor” wasnotsubstantiatedandismisleadingbyambiguityandimplicationastheadvertiseronly providescoachingfortheentranceexam.Theclaim“Getupto100%scholarship” wasnot substantiatedandismisleadingbyambiguityandomissionregardingthescholarshipdetails suchastheamountandthecriteria.

14.SPSmartDigital: Theadvertisement’sclaim,“1stSchoolinIndiatoofferfullydigitalschooling”, wasnotsubstantiated withverifiablecomparativedataoftheadvertiser’sinstituteandsimilar institutes toprovethattheyareIndia’s1stschoolthantheresttoprovidedigitalschooling services,orthroughanindependent thirdpartyvalidation.Theclaimismisleadingby exaggeration andexploitsconsumers’lackofknowledgeandislikelytoleadtograveor widespreaddisappointmentinthemindsofconsumers.

Complaintsagainstadvertisements of39educationalinstituteslistedbelowareUPHELDmainly becauseofunsubstantiatedclaimsAND/ORmisleadingclaimsthattheyprovide100% placement/ placementassistanceAND/ORtheyclaimtobetheNo.1intheirrespectivefields.

TravedoInstitute ofHotelManagement,GoldenDreams,Institute ofScienceandManagement, Mumbai International School, AashviAcademy, Academics Future Solution Group, Amrita VishwaVidyapeetham, BansalClassesPvtLtd,ClatPrepEducation,CruxAcademy,Focus Academy for Competitive Exams, ArcotSri MahalakshmiWomensCollege, Bansal Classes, DhokaiClasses,IBTInstitutePvt.Ltd,IFBI‐InstituteofFinance,BankingandInsurance,KautilyaClasses,PahalDesign,RaoIITAcademy,SafalAcademy,ScopeComputerEducation, Global Instituteofhotelandhospitalitymanagement,BigLearnings,Media3InternationalPvt.Ltd‐ Media,AhireClasses,AkbarAcademyofAirlineStudies,BodhiSchoolInternational, DaiyaClasses,DashmeshAcademy,DevClasses,IBTInstitutePvt.Ltd,IshwarKripaCareerInstitute, LawPrepTutorial,NarendraTiwariIASAcademy, AllIndiaEducationResearchAcademyLtd‐ ERAKidsAPlaySchool,PrayasAcademy,BismiEducationalTrust‐VICTGroupofEducational Institutions, VinayakaMissionsResearchFoundation, AICP‐AshutoshInstituteforComputer Professionals

HEALTHCARE:

1. Jyothy Laboratories Ltd: The claim “organic” in the TVC is likely to be perceived by consumers as something which is “Natural” or “Not chemical” and not as “an organic chemical compound” as has been supported via certification. Based on the advertiser’s response with the supporting technical data, the advertisement’s claim, “100% organic” is misleading by omission of the word “chemical”. The claim exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

2. (YLG) R and R Salons Pvt Ltd: The advertisement’s claims, “World’s first skin care solution that slows regrowth of body hair to keep that just-waxed look for longer” and “World’s first range of products with Deplif active system that retards hair regrowth and gives freedom from body hair for longer”, were not adequately substantiated with any verifiable comparative data to support the claim of the advertiser’s products being the “World’s first”. The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration.

3. Sri Sai Healthcare: The advertisement’s claim, “For prolonged joint pain, neck pain, back pain, paralysis, road accidents and prolonged rheumatism, we are giving permanent solution through Kerala Varma treatment in short span”, was not substantiated and was misleading by exaggeration.

4. Dr.Samrat Clinic Pvt Ltd – Dr.Samrat Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “World famous and Number one Ayurved treatment centre” and “Permanent treatment to quit Bidi, cigarette, gutkha, tobacco, proxyvoncapusle, afeem, charas, dode post, injection and other intoxication.”, were not substantiated with any evidence of product efficacy. The claims were misleading by exaggeration and exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

5. Homeocare: The advertisement’s claim, “World’s one and only Homeopathic clinic for children”, was not substantiated and the claim is misleading by exaggeration.

6. D.S Research Centre: The testimonial claim in the advertisement of Ms. Kamalkali Mukherjee and Mr. Radhakanta Pal (in Bengali) as translated in English, “Successful treatment of many patients has been possible” and the claim implying cure for cancer was not substantiated. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

7. Dr.Batra’s Positive Health Clinic – Dr.Batra’s Homeopathic Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Proven and preferred” was not substantiated. The claim, “100% Cure”, in the context of conditions shown in the advertisement of baldness, white spots, psoriasis was not proven with any clinical evidence. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and specific to the visual and claim implying cure for vitiligo /white spots, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

8. Dr.Batra’s Positive Health Clinic – Dr.Batra’s Homeopathic Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “India’s most trusted homeopathy brand” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s brand and other similar Homeopathy brands in India, or through a third party validation. The superlative claim is misleading by exaggeration. The claim “Stem cell treatment, after six weeks new hair gets developed” was not substantiated with any scientific evidence or proof of product efficacy. The claims are misleading, exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

9. Gen Siddha Hospital: The advertisement’s claim, “Autism, cerebral palsy, mentally retarded – 100% cure with evidences.” was not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence and is misleading by exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

10. TrivancoreAyurvedic Hospital: The advertisement’s claims, “Rheumatic diseases are cured immediately”, “Patients who are affected with infertility are treated specially and cured permanently” and “Patients suffering from mental stress are treated through reformation treatment and cure completely” were not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence and are misleading by exaggeration and exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

11. Gen Siddha Hospital: The advertisement’s claim implying cure of mental diseases/retardation was not substantiated with any scientific rationale or clinical evidence and is misleading by exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

12. Hashmi Dawakhana: The advertisement’s claim, “For successful treatment of small/ thin organs, premature ejaculation, increasing organ size and improving your sexual ability” was not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence. Specific to the claims implying cure for all kinds of sexual problems, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

13. HB Care 24 (Dr Regain Products): The advertisement’s claim, “Stops hair fall in just five days”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “Removes baldness in two hours” accompanied by a before and after visual, is misleading by ambiguity, implication and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge.

14. Abhijay Hospital Private Limited (ARC International Fertility & Research Centre): The advertisement’s claim, “Most Trusted Fertility Hospital”, was not adequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The claim, “World Guinness Achievement & Asian Book Achievement” was misleading by ambiguity, implication and omission of the details of the achievement.

15. Mitera Hospital: The advertisement’s claim (in Malayalam) as translated in English, “Kerala’s Best IVF Lab”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s treatment centre and similar treatment centres in Kerala to prove that it is better than the rest, or through an independent, third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and implication.

16. Starkey Laboratories India Pvt Ltd – Starkey: The advertisement’s claim, “India’s Biggest Hearing Aid Company”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative market share data of the advertiser’s product and products of other leading hearing aid companies in India, or through an independent, third party audit or verification certificate, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.

17. Vital Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Get proper permanent body shape by Liposuction”, was false, misleading by exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge that is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

18. Orthomax Hospital and Trauma Centre: The advertisement’s claims, “Cures polio legs”, “Cures old wrongly fixed fracture” and “Treats crooked legs of child from the birth without operation.” were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and are misleading by gross exaggeration.

19. Woodlands Hospital: The advertisement’s claim, “The most trusted brand for women care in Eastern India.”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital with other similar hospitals in Eastern India or through an independent, third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.

20. Hair Doc Trichology Hair Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “India’s first hair growth treatment”, was not substantiated with any verifiable data to prove that there were no other hair growth treatments available in India prior to the advertised product. It was observed that such a situation is unlikely as well. The claim was misleading by exaggeration.

21. Hair Doc Trichology Hair Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Stop hair loss”, was not substantiated. The “before and after” visuals in the advertisement implying efficacy of the product were misleading.

22. Max Hair Studio International Pvt Ltd – Max Hair: The advertisement’s claims, claims “Oxygen laser therapy – Promotes hair regrowth” and “Stem cell treatments – Promote thicker hair growth”, were not substantiated. The “before and after” visuals in the advertisement implying efficacy of the product were misleading.

23. Allen Healthcare Co. Ltd – Livosin DS: The advertisement’s claim, “Double strength, double action and double protection to liver” was not substantiated with any scientific evidence or proof of product efficacy. When viewed with the other claim in the advertisement stating that the product helps in maintaining liver damaged due to alcohol consumption in healthy state, the advertisement is misleading by implication that it is safe to indulge in alcohol consumption.

24. Chetanta Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Perform successful treatment for diabetes and thyroid through Karn Acupressure without medicines” and “Perform treatment with Karn Acupressure which treat naturally and give freedom from diabetes and thyroid” were not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence. The claims implying complete treatment for diabetes and thyroid are misleading by gross exaggeration, exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

25. GudghedukhiUpchar Kendra – Kayakalp Kesh Ayurved: The advertisement’s claim, “Stop hair fall in just 7 days” were not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence. The claims implying complete stoppage of hair fall is misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

26. Star Ayurveda – Star Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, “Get rid of Asthma” were not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence. The claims implying cure for Asthma is misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

27. SanjeevaniNetralaya Retina Care Centre – SanjeevaniNetralaya: The advertisement’s claim, “Treats every (any kind of) retina problem successfully when all other advanced techniques, laser, injections have failed with only Ayurvedic medicine”, was not substantiated with any authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence and is misleading by gross exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure of retina problems, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge which is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

28. Swamiji Multi speciality Ayurvedic Hospital –SwamijiAyurvedic Consulting and Chikitsa Kendra: The advertisement’s claim, “Two to five kilograms in seven days.”, “Lose weight in seven days” and “Lose 20 to 30 kilograms weight without fasting, exercise, surgery, strict diet or food supplement”, were not substantiated with any clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data. The assurance of quantitative results in a finite period regardless of individual conditions is misleading by exaggeration.

29. Rana Ayurveda: The advertisement’s claim, “Orissa’s No. 1 Ayurvedic hospital.” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and other similar Ayurvedic hospitals in Orissa or through a third party validation. The leadership claim is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “A medical treatment/ treatment procedure that gives 100 percent guaranteed solution for diabetes, piles, fistula, obesity and all kinds of sexual problems.” was not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence. Also the claims implying cure for diabetes, obesity, all kind of sexual problems is in breach of the law as it violates The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

30. R & R Diabetic & Thyroid Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Have experience for successful treatment of thyroid, diabetes and hormonal diseases of almost 2000 patients”, was not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence and is misleading.

31. Star Ayurveda – Star Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, “Put an end to Asthma” were not substantiated with authentic, credible scientific / clinical evidence. The claim implying complete cure for Asthma is misleading by gross exaggeration. The claim exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers as well as it is in breach of law as it violates The Drugs & Magic Remedies Regulation.

32. Zilaxo Advanced Pain Solution (Zilaxo): The advertisement’s claim, “Zilaxo Advanced Pain Solution provides successful treatment of root cause, which gives complete relief to patients.” was not substantiated and implied that Zilaxo Advanced Pain Solution successfully treats lumbar spondylosis. The claim was misleading by exaggeration.

33. Sigma Health Care – Aerofit Fitness Equipment: The advertisement’s claim, “India’s No.1 Fitness Brand”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s brand and other similar competitor brands, or through a third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.

34. H and B – Hair and Beyond: The advertisement’s claim, “Head full of hair in just one session”, was not substantiated and was misleading by exaggeration.

35. Healing Hasta Herbal Concepts – My Dr Pain Relief Oil: The advertisement’s claims, “Recommended by doctor.”, and “Unique herb ‘YavniSatva’ which is helpful to give relief from pain for longer time”, were not substantiated.

36. Jolly Health Care – Jolly Tulsi 51 Drops: The advertisement’s claims, “The only belief tried by crores of Indians”, and testimonial of Mr. Rathi indicating relief from depression were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

FOOD &BEVERAGE: ‐

1. MaansProducts(India)–NirdoshCigarette:Theadvertisement’sclaimof‘TheWorld’sfirst smokethat is beneficial for your health’, in absence of any disclaimers regarding its use strictly for medicinal purpose, is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The claim exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge.

2. Emprove‐EmproveGreenCoffee: The advertisement’s claims, “The weight loss brew” and “Keeps diabetes in check” were not adequately substantiated and are misleading by implication.

3. SunrajaOilIndustries‐Mr.GoldRefinedGroundnut:Theadvertisement’s claim,“Tohave phytesteroladvantagesoonecaneatwhatevertheywantabsorption”wasnotsubstantiated andismisleadingbyexaggeration.Theadvertisementstating“Nowone caneatwhat they love” showing banana and egg in a plate getting replaced with fried purees undermines the importance ofhealthyfoodoptionssuchasfruitsandproteinsandislikelytoencourage excessiveconsumptionoffriedfood. Claims thatgroundnutoilwithmorephytosterolmakes15 percentlessercholesterolabsorptionismisleadingbyambiguityandimplication thatitwould resultinbettercholesterolprofileinthebody.

4. KBRLLimited‐IndiaGateBrownBasmatiRice:Theadvertisement’sclaims,“Brainmetabolism booster”,“Enhancingfocus”and“Reducinganxiety”werenotsubstantiated fortheadvertised productandaremisleading.

5. GopalBhogAtta:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“100%FibreAtta”,wasnotsubstantiatedwith verifiablesupporting data.Theclaimismisleading byambiguityandimplication regardingthe fibrecontentintheproduct.

6. OrangeNutraceuticals (SweetnZero):Theadvertisement showstheFSSAIlogoinanon‐ standardformatimplyingthatitisanendorsement fromtheFSSAIwhichisinviolationofthe FSSAIadvisory.Theprintadvertisementismisleadingbyimplication.

7. SuperSaltPvtLtd–(TopLineActivNaturalSalt):Theadvertisement’sclaim,“Bettersalt”,was notsubstantiated withanytechnicalevidenceoranyverifiablecomparative dataofthe advertiser’s productandcompetitor products toprovethatitisbetterthantherest. Theclaim ismisleadingby ambiguityandimplication.

8. BhopalSahakariSanghDugdha(SanchiMilk):Theadvertisement’sclaim,inHindi(SampoornAahar)readinEnglish as,“completemeal”, wasnotsubstantiated.The claimimplyingcomplete mealreplacementismisleadingbyexaggerationandexploits consumers’lackofknowledgeand islikelytoleadtograveorwidespreaddisappointmentinthemindsofconsumers.

PERSONAL CARE: ‐

1. LotusHerbalsLtd–LotusColorkickLipSugar:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“ColorkickLipSugar withSPF‐20”wasnotsubstantiatedwithevidence ofproductefficacyortechnical rationaleand theclaimmisleading.

2. BesureHealthcarePvtLtd/BesureBlack&BeautyCharcoalSoap:Theadvertisement’sclaims, “Protectsskinfromwithin”and“Reducesporesizeandlightensunderarms”, werenot substantiatedwithanytechnicalrationaleorevidenceofproductefficacy.Theclaims,inthe contextofa bathingsoap,aremisleadingbyexaggeration.

OTHERS: ‐

1. Gupta Builders & Promoters Pvt Ltd (GBP Centrum): The advertisement’s claim, “Asia’s Greatest Brand 2017”, was inadequately substantiated.

2. TopNotchInfotronixPvtLtd(Zebronics):The advertisement’sclaim,“No.1SpeakerBrand”,was inadequatelysubstantiated.Theclaimismisleadingbyexaggerationandomission ofthesource fortheclaimandexploitsconsumers’lackofknowledge. Itislikelytoleadtograveor widespreaddisappointment inthemindsofconsumers.Thevisualofthecelebrity(HrithikRoshan)whenseeninconjunction withtheclaimislikelytomisleadconsumersregardingthe product.TheadvertisementalsocontravenedtheASCIGuidelinesforCelebritiesinAdvertising.

3. CambridgeClothingCompanyLLP–CambridgeRange:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“Largest Men’swearshowroom”, wasnotsubstantiated withanyverifiablecomparative dataofthe advertiser’sshowroomandothersimilarshowrooms ofcompetitorbrands/inthesame category,orthroughathirdpartyvalidation.Theclaimwasmisleadingbyexaggeration.

4. MaduraFashion&Lifestyle(VanHeusenAnti‐BacterialInnerwear):Theadvertisement’sclaim, “TheAntibacterialInnerwear”doesnotstateforhowmanywashesthe‘PureSilverAntibacterial Technology’lastsinaninnerwear.The‘Anti‐Bacterial’ claimwasnotsubstantiatedandis misleadingbyambiguityandomission.

5. 3MIndiaLimited(ScotchBriteAntibacterialScrubPad):Theadvertisement’sclaim,“Anti‐bacterialscrubpad‐Doesnotletbacteriastay.”wasinadequatelysubstantiated.Theclaimismisleading byomissionwithreferencetoefficacyperiodoftheproductandbyimplication that itsefficacywouldremainunchanged.

6. PommysGarments(India)Ltd–PommysNighties&InnerWears:Theadvertisement’sclaim, “India’sNo.1nightybrand”,wasnotsubstantiated withanyverifiablecomparativedataofthe advertiser’sbrand withothersimilar competitorbrands, orthrough athirdparty validation.The claimismisleadingbyexaggeration.

7. VaaniWaterSolution–VaaniWaterPurifier:Theadvertisement’sclaim,“India’sNo.1Alkaline ROWaterPurifier”,wasnotsubstantiated withanyverifiablecomparative dataofthe advertiser’sbrand withothersimilar competitorbrands orthroughathirdparty validation. The claimismisleadingbyexaggeration.

Leave a Reply

20 + 15 =

Top