Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 01 JUNE 2013

NAD Driven To Wreck Comparative Claims, Although Monadic Claims Are Covered

When making comparative claims to an unnamed generic competitor, even with humor, NAD will require you to substantiate your superiority as to all major competitors.

United StatesMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment

When making comparative claims to an unnamed generic competitor, even with humor, NAD will require you to substantiate your superiority as to all major competitors.  Some advertisers feel naming a specific competitor is riskier and they will more likely be challenged if they call out a particular brand but the substantiation burden may be higher if they do not.  

Case in point is a recent challenge by Allstate to Progressive ads where the adorable quirky spokesperson, Flo, is discussing the numerous discounts Progressive offers that "A. Nother Insurance Co." does not.  Allstate argued that a reasonable takeaway from the ads is that Progressive is the only significant competitor that offers the same benefits.  Allstate asserted it had all of the same discounts, such as safe driver and loyalty price breaks.  Progressive said the ads were not comparative to a real competing insurance company but instead the A. Nother Insurance Company was just a generic straw man.  Even

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from