P&G advertising beauty claims dismissed as non-existent

by Jennifer Whitehead, Brand Republic 11-May-05, 09:00

LONDON - Procter & Gamble has admitted advertising claims for its Pantene Pro-V shampoo brand were 'advertising puffery', with the watchdog finding that little claimed in its ads stood up to closer examination as it rapped the beauty giant.

Two complaints were made about an ad created for Pantene Pro-V and conditioner by Grey London.

The ad said that hair was made of "up to 90% of amino acids". It also said that the formula of Pantene Pro-V would "help replenish key aminos" and make hair "up to 10 times stronger so it springs back to life", but two viewers said the ad was misleading and felt it used scientific words inappropriately.

As well as the complaints from viewers, the Advertising Standards Authority challenged the claim that the amino acids were "key", and whether it was misleading viewers by referring to the "life" of hair and making claims about hair being up to 10 times stronger while the text "10 x stronger" appeared on the screen.

Procter & Gamble provided the authority with scientific evidence to back up some of the claims made in the ad. However, it said that the claim "you can put back what life takes out" would be recognised by viewers as advertising puffery that would not be taken literally.

All the complaints were upheld by the ASA after it consulted with an expert. He disagreed that Pantene Pro-V could replenish amino acids, and questioned the use of the word. The expert said the two amino acids shown to be most lost from hair were not actually present in the product -- belying the "key" claim.

The ASA also ruled that the strength claim did not make clear how hair strength was measured and felt it could mislead viewers into believing hair would be physically stronger. It said the ad should not be shown again in its current form.

Separately, Estee Lauder has been told it can not imply that a skin serum reduces the appearance of cellulite after a complaint about an ad that said the product would "help keep that dimpled look from coming back". The ASA said that the ad was likely to mislead consumers and asked Estee Lauder not to make the claim in its future ads.

If you have an opinion on this or any other issue raised on Brand Republic, join the debate in the Forum.