The Rin washing powder commercial directly named and compared itself to rival brand Tide by P&G, claiming it provided better whiteness. This was a bold move by HUL to openly take on a competitor without censoring the rival's name. While some felt it personally insulted Tide users, others appreciated HUL's confidence. Comparative advertising is permissible under Indian law if factual, accurate and not misleading. P&G sued HUL over the ad, but it was found that P&G misled consumers about Tide Naturals being natural when it was actually synthetic. The ad was eventually banned.
The Rin washing powder commercial directly named and compared itself to rival brand Tide by P&G, claiming it provided better whiteness. This was a bold move by HUL to openly take on a competitor without censoring the rival's name. While some felt it personally insulted Tide users, others appreciated HUL's confidence. Comparative advertising is permissible under Indian law if factual, accurate and not misleading. P&G sued HUL over the ad, but it was found that P&G misled consumers about Tide Naturals being natural when it was actually synthetic. The ad was eventually banned.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
The Rin washing powder commercial directly named and compared itself to rival brand Tide by P&G, claiming it provided better whiteness. This was a bold move by HUL to openly take on a competitor without censoring the rival's name. While some felt it personally insulted Tide users, others appreciated HUL's confidence. Comparative advertising is permissible under Indian law if factual, accurate and not misleading. P&G sued HUL over the ad, but it was found that P&G misled consumers about Tide Naturals being natural when it was actually synthetic. The ad was eventually banned.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
m In the first move of its kind by HUL, homecare brand
Rin has openly taken on rival P&G¶s Tide, without the
typical airbrushing or pixellation to hide the rival brand name on TV. m The Rin washing powder commercial, which went on air on Friday, claims to be a better quality product in comparison to Tide. m The visual clearly shows a variant of Tide, Tide Naturals m Rin with the audio saying µTide se kahin behatar safedi de Rin¶ - (Rin gives better whiteness than Tide). m VERY BLATENT ACT OF HUL. m MANY TIDE USER FELT PERSONALLY INSULTED m FEW APPERICIATED THE CONFIDENCE OF HUL, INTENED TO KNOW THE REASON BEHIND IT. m IS SUCH KIND OF ADVERTISING LEGAL? m MOTIVE BEHIND THIS AD m IS IT JOINT COURSE OF HUL AND P&G TO SHOOT IMMEDIATE SAIL. m IS IT RINS ATTEMPT TO BRING INTO FOCUS - THE TIDE¶S REALITY? m Sued HUL at kolkata high court m File case of injunction, based on disreputation. m YES IT IS LEGAL m In my view, comparative advertising is permissible if it¶s based on facts. Advertising Standards Council of India, has this to say about comparative advertising in it¶s Code of Conduct . m þ To ensure that Advertisements observe fairness in competition such that the Consumer¶s need to be informed on choice in the Market-Place and the Canons of generally accepted competitive behaviour in Business are both served. 1. Advertisements containing comparisons with other manufacturers or suppliers or with other products including those where a competitor is named, are permissible in the interests of vigorous competition and public enlightenment, provided: (a) It is clear what aspects of the advertiser¶s product are being compared with what aspects of the competitor¶s product. (b) The subject matter of comparison is not chosen in such a way as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser or so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. (c) The comparisons are factual, accurate and capable of substantiation. (d) There is no likelihood of the consumer being misled as a result of the comparison, whether about the product advertised or that with which it is compared. (e) The advertisement does not unfairly denigrate, attack or discredit other products, advertisers or advertisements directly or by implication. m Rin ad - claim is limited to a whiter wash- µR
¶. m The difference here -The competitor has been named. m HUL¶s spokeperson says- µ
m HUL has decided to engage P&G directly, backed by laboratory data and certification of a superior quality product m Advertisement is banned . m Truth of tide naturals. m Act of misleading consumers by P&G, was found. m Tide naturals ± a total synthetic product. m Claims of RIN were indirectly accepted. m Common public still thinks RIN has done a blatent thing m Awareness about the ban of advertisement. m Negligible information about tide naturals misleading advertisement , with fake information to again customer attention.