Best Media Info

Editor’s Picks
Special
Interviews
Events
Cannes Lions 2018

Guest Times

ASCI penalises 152 ads in August

Of these, 27 belonged to the Healthcare category, 66 to the Education category, followed by 17 in the Food & Beverages category, 10 in Personal Care Category, 5 in clothing and accessories category and 27 from other categories

BestMediaInfo Bureau | Mumbai | November 22. 2016

asci-logoIn August 2016, ASCI’s Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) upheld complaints against 152 out of 209 advertisements. Out of these 152 advertisements, 27 belonged to the Healthcare category, 66 to the Education category, followed by 17 in the Food & Beverages category, 10 in Personal Care Category, five in clothing and accessories category and  27 advertisements from other categories.

HEALTH CARE

The CCC found the following claims of 27 advertisements in health care products or services to be either misleading or false or not adequately / scientifically substantiated and hence violating ASCI’s Code. Some of the health care products or services advertisements also contravened provisions of the Drug & Magic Remedies Act and Chapter 1.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. Complaints against the following advertisements were UPHELD.

  1. Rajvaidya Shital Prasad & Sons (Hempushpa): The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi), “No. 1 Medicine and Tonic trusted of crores of women since 90 years”, was not substantiated with supporting proof, and is misleading by exaggeration. They also claim, “Women Health Issues? Treat it from the Roots” which was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading.

 

  1. Olefia Biopharma Limited (Votif Range of Products): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “The lack of sexual desire”, “Premature ejaculation & nightfall”, “Scanty & thin semen”, “Swelling on nerves & lack of strength”, “Low sperm count & their weakness”, “Incomplete development of organs”, “Inability to complete the act of Fertility”, “Sagging of organ due to old age”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. In addition, specific to the claims implying treatment for all sexual problems, and the claims, “The lack of sexual desire”, “Premature ejaculation & nightfall”, “Inability to complete the act of Fertility”, “Decrease in Erection”, read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure and is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

 

  1. Chetanta (Get Diabetes cured by acupressure Spring): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati), as translated into English, “Diabetes expert Dr. Chetan Daswani has treated innumerable patients and they have benefited from it. Dr. Daswani cures the disease of diabetes without giving any medicine, injection, and tablet. He has done this successful research”, were not substantiated with data to prove qualifications of Dr. Chetan Daswani as a diabetes expert, clinical evidence to support treatment without medicine and are grossly misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to treatment for Diabetes, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

 

  1. DHI-Hair Restoration: The advertisement’s claims, “World’s No. 1 Hair Restoration Company”, “Offers solution to all stages of hair loss”,  “200,000 delighted clients”,  “120 procedures every day”, were not substantiated with supporting proof, and are misleading.  Further the claim, “Ranked no. 1 by IMRB”, was not substantiated.  The parameter on which it was ranked No.1 was not made available. Also, the date and source for this claim as a reference was not indicated in the advertisement, and is misleading by ambiguity.

 

  1. Jay Pranav Ayurvedic Pharmaceuticals (Body Plus Capsules): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Increase Appetite” and “Gain Weight”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy of the product and any clinical evidence and are misleading.

 

  1. Shri Ram Hospital: The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Successful Treatment of Piles, Fissure, Fistula”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to successful treatment for Piles, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945.

 

  1. Chetan Clinic: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Sex Problems? Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines”, was not substantiated with clinical data and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to successful treatment for sex problems and the claims, “Sex Problems? Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines” and “Now You too can Enjoy Married Life to your Heart’s Content”, read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

 

  1. Anupama Ayurvedic Drug Co. (Arish Tanclear Range): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s most trusted brand”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category.  The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission.

 

  1. Nurture Health Care (Ayurex S Capsule): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “For Men Only”,  “Vitality Capsules”, “Difference Guaranteed” and “In the Times of Happiness for Extra Pleasure”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data and are misleading.  Also, these claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement visual imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

 

  1. Divine Care: The advertisement of Divine Care claims, “Permanent End to Pain” and “No pain, No Surgery, No Diet, No Side Effect”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading.

 

  1. Zenlabs Ethics (Zenovit Soft Gel): The advertisement’s claims, “No 1 brand in its category”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission.

 

  1. Jippo African Capsule and African Oil: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “100% Ayurvedic, No Side Effects”, “100% Satisfaction Guaranteed”, “Men can use capsule and oil for better results” and “Amateurs can also use and see effects”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data and are misleading.  Also, these claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement visual and the pack visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

 

  1. Bhavana Shah Fitness Care Pvt. Ltd. (Fat Freeze): The advertisement’s claims, “World’s Best Waist Reduction Treatment” and “Latest and Fastest Technology”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Kerni Fitness Pvt Ltd (Fitness Universe): The advertisement’s claims, “We offer a complete range of powders, capsules, bars, and drinks. These clinically proven, scientific nutritional supplements are developed through a six-stage research process that utilizer the expertise of leading nutritional scientists, doctors and universities”, were not substantiated with technical data, evidence of the six stage research process as well clinical research and are misleading.

 

  1. Amba Health Clinic: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Treatment to gain Weight”, “Stayed Development”, “Increase height or get your money back”, “Sure-shot Treatment of piles”, “Effective from the beginning, get cured in 60-90 Days”, “Nightfall, Premature Ejaculation, Sexual weakness in Men”, “Masturbation, Penis Disorders, Weakness in Nerves”, “You can get rid of loose thin and crooked Penis”, “Itchiness in your sexual Organs”, “Low Sperm Count”, “Ovarian Cyst”, “Leucorrhoea White Discharge”, “Sagging of Sexual Organs”, “Lack of Sexual Desire”, “Irregular Periods”, “Make you small loose underdeveloped chest into a shapely, beautiful and attractive one”, “Enhance your Feminity” and “Improve Husband Wife Relationship”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. In addition, specific to the claims related to increase in height, and treatment for sexual diseases, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, 1954.  As for the claims related to treatment for Piles, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945.

 

  1. Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Indore Becomes the country’s Number 1 City for Freedom from Obesity”, “Created a New Record in surgery of Obesity” and “Research Consultant Team from TOI announced Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics to be Country’s Best Centre”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Rex Remedies Pvt Ltd (Rex Dimaghi Brain Tonic): The advertisement’s claim (in Urdu) as translated into English, “Increases the memory, Gives Success”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. German Homeo Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (German Homeo Laboratory): The advertisement’s claims (in Bengali) as translated into English, “Don't be upset, without side-effect use homeo treatment” and “Our Speciality Treatment – Lack of Sex Desire, Arthritis, Piles, Fistula, White Patches, Psoriasis, Sterile, Women’s Problem, Obesity, Gastric Blood Pressure”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims related to treatment for sexual problems, with the headline “Unhappy married life/ unsuccessful married life” and the visual implying enhancement of sexual pleasure, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, 1954.

 

  1. Women’s Centre: The advertisement’s claims, “Comprehensive Women's Hospital of the Year (South India)” is based on the award given by Brands Academy. However, there was a mismatch of the claim and the text in the award certificate which mentions “Best Dedicated Women’s Hospital in South India”. Hence the claim is was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and omission. Further for the claim, “Asia Pacific’s Only Fibroid Centre” is based on the award given by Insightec.  However, no details were provided for the background of the survey criteria for selection, other institutes that were assessed etc.   The year for which the award is received is not mentioned in the certificate.  The claim in the advertisement is not qualified to mention the source and date of the award under which the award was given to the institute. Hence the claim is not adequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and omission.

 

  1. S. Hospital: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “The only Centre for High risk Deliveries”, was not substantiated. Also, the claim “Successful Treatment of infertility in childless couples” is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Also, these claims are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Kudos Laboratories India Limited (Kudoos Range of Products): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “100 Years of Experience”,  “In  India 1st time untouched Ayurvedic medicine for Diabetes”,  “Human Clinical Trial Tested”, were not  substantiated adequately, and are misleading by exaggeration and implication. In addition, specific to the claim of treatment and control of diabetes, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Also, the advertisement’s claims related to  Kudos Active Slim Tea, “Helpful in weight control”,  “Mixture of green tea, long pepper,  work and other 10 ayurvedic medicines”,  “Helps in Digestion process”,  “Cure in Metabolism”,  “Helps in weight  reduce”,  “Increase energy - gives stamina” and “Increase immunity - keep away from disease”,  were not  substantiated adequately with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Pretti Slim Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Mumbai's No. 1 slimming clinic”, “Lose Belly Fat And Become Fit”, were not adequately substantiated with comparative data versus other similar clinics and criteria for selection. Specific to the claim of “Lose belly fat and become fit”, it was noted that while some fat loss may be possible with treatments, fitness is also achieved by other means such as healthy lifestyle and exercise regimens etc. Hence, the claim, “Lose Belly Fat And Become Fit”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence for the services being offered. The claims as well as the visual in the advertisement – particularly of the male model shown in a trouser that is very loose at the waist, implying a significant weight loss, is also misleading.

 

  1. Avion Biotech (K lor Free): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati), as translated into English, “Controls the diabetes by increasing the production of insulin”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Dassan’s Ayurvedic Herbal (Body Walk Oil): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “More Active Part BODY WALK OIL and medicine penetrates deep in to the joints and helps produce cartilage and works on the pain from the roots”, “Now no need to change your Knee” and “Results in 20 Days or Money Back”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Rana’s Health Care (Gaino Power Powder): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “We will give you Freedom from Thin Body”, “Tested on more and more people” and “Shows immediate effect”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (Zydus Acti Life): The advertisement’s claims, “Cholesterol Control” and “to reduce the cholesterol”, were not substantiated, and are misleading.

 

  1. I Education Trust (NIMS Blacumin Tea): The advertisement claims (in Malayalam), as translated into English, “Blacumin, a solution to every disease, now in tea powder”, “We can consume Blacumin, which is Natural Immunisation Improve, in the form of Nims Blacumin Tea”, “Make Nims Tea your habit” and “Stay away from Diseases”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.

 

FOOD & BEVERAGES

  1. B P Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (Double Trishul Atta): The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as translated into English, “The Double Trishul Atta Chakki Fresh Atta is packed with natural food grade packing material so that the entire family can be protected from many serious diseases”, was not substantiated and is misleading.

 

  1. Eastern Foods Pvt. Ltd. (Eastern Spices): The advertisement’s claim, “India's No.1 Spice Company”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category, and with market share sales data, and is misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Organic India Pvt. Ltd. (Organic Ghee): The advertisement’s claims, “100% Organic”, “USDA Organic”, “From organically raised mother cows" and pack claim in the advertisement “100% certified organic”, were not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, these claims are considered to be misleading by ambiguity.

 

  1. Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. (Pan Vilas Pan Masala): The advertisement’s (Print) claim, “India’s Most Trusted Brand”, was substantiated but the claim was misleading by omission of the mention of the specific product category as well as source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made.

 

  1. Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. (Pan Vilas Pan Masala): The advertisement’s (TVC) claim, “India’s Most Trusted Brand”, was substantiated, but the claim was misleading by omission of the mention of the specific product category as well as source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made.

 

  1. Veekay Natural Foods (Nutri Millets): The advertisement’s claim, “No added maida, preservatives, cholesterol, transfat”, was not substantiated and is misleading.

 

  1. PepsiCo India Holdings P. Ltd. (Tropicana Litchi Delight): The advertisement on the product pack of Tropicana Litchi Delight says Litchi Delight and shows dominant image of Litchi with a subdued image of apple in the background, which is misleading as the name “Litchi Delight” is inconsistent with the content of the product. It was noted that the product predominantly delivers the taste of apple juice and the list of ingredients on the pack mention concentrated apple juice 3.2% and Litchi Pulp 1.8%, which means the apple content, is more than litchi. It was concluded that the product packaging contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code and Clause 8 of the Guidelines on Advertising of Foods & Beverages (“Claims in advertisements should not be inconsistent with information on the label or packaging of the food or beverage.”).

  1. Bluebird purifier RO water: The claim in the advertisement, “its alkaline minerals protect you from diseases”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity as there was no conclusive evidence to show how the water is richer in alkaline minerals and provides protection from diseases.

  1. Narang Group (Ocean Fruit Water): The advertiser had declared that in the ingredient list on the label, the quantity of Glucose, Electrolytes and Vitamins are present in each 500ml of Ocean Fruit Water. But it was noted that while these ingredients are present in the beverage, the adjective “Packed with” is misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. T.C. Limited (Aashirvaad Sugar Release Control Atta): It was observed in the advertisement of Aashirvaad Sugar Release Control Atta that the graphical representation indicates the sugar release pattern of high GI food and the voice over states that the advertised product would not result in sudden spike in your sugar level. Hence the product description of “Sugar release control” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication that the low GI atta has curative property in reducing the overall blood sugar level. Further the advertisement is set in the context of the protagonist’s husband having high sugar level. While the claim, “Natural grain mix in the atta ensures your sugar levels do not rise suddenly” holds for the sugar release from the atta based food, it is likely that the consumers would be misled into believing that the low GI atta would have beneficial / curative effect on sugar release of other High GI food that is ingested as well. Also, the claim, “Eat rotis without worrying about sugar levels”, is misleading by ambiguity as rotis cannot be eaten by diabetics in excess. High intake of carbohydrates, even though low in GI value, will ultimately increase sugar levels.

  1. K. Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. Refined (Sunpure Sunflower Oil): The advertisement’s claim that Sunflower oil has “Natural Oryzanol”, was not substantiated with supporting technical data and is misleading.  It was noted that Oryzanol is available in Rice bran oil and to claim presence of Natural Oryzanol in Sunflower oil, the manufacturer would have to mix Rice Bran Oil to Sunflower Oil. Such composition would make it “blended oil” and since the Oil does not say it is a blended oil, it is very unlikely that Oryzanol is included in the Sunflower oil.

  1. Sunnah Enterprises (Barley Sattu): The advertisement’s claims (in Urdu) as translated into English, “Keeps your weight in control”, “Keep Protection from Sunlight and Heat”,  “benefit in migraine” and “prevent obesity”,  were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. It was also noted that the FSSAI number quoted in the advertisement (13815015000173) was an invalid number.

  1. Devyani Food Industries Ltd. (Cream Bell Ice Cream): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s Most Promising Brand”, was substantiated, but the claim was misleading by omission of the mention of the specific product category, the year of receipt of award as well as source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made.

  1. Beltek Canadian Wayer Ltd. (Wild Vitamin Drink): The advertisement’s claim that most of the beverages in the industry contain more than 10 gm of sugar per 100 ml was not substantiated. Hence, the claim “low sugar” was misleading by ambiguity.

  1. Vishnu Pouch Packaging Pvt. Ltd. (Vimal Elaichi): It was observed that the product packaging of both the products (Vimal Pan Masala and Vimal Elaichi) resembles each other, but the advertisement of Vimal Elaichi continues to have the same tag-line that was promoted earlier by the same celebrity protagonist (Ajay Devgan) for the Pan Masala product. Also, while the product is available for sale only in one state, the advertisement is not restricted to Gujarat alone. Further, the scale of advertising of the Elaichi product is disproportionate to the quantities being sold. Hence is was concluded that the Vimal Elaichi advertisement is misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose advertising is restricted by this Code.) Also, the advertisement did not meet the requirements as per ASCI's Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension Product or Service and thereby contravened Chapter III.6 (a) of the ASCI Code (“Whether the unrestricted product which is purportedly sought to be promoted through the advertisement under the complaint is produced and distributed in reasonable quantities, having regard to the scale of the advertising in question, the media used and the markets targeted.”).
  2. Green Rev Agro Pvt. Ltd. (Zero Sugar): The advertisement claims, “Balances blood sugar & lowers your blood pressure”, “Improves immunity”, were not substantiated and are grossly misleading.

 

  1. VKS Verve Nectars Pvt Ltd (bgood Honey): The advertisement’s claims (in Malayalam), as translated into English, “Keep you young”,  “Reduce Weight, Extra fat”, “Increase Immunity Power” and “Good for child brain growth”, were not adequately substantiated for the advertised product with evidence of product efficacy and are misleading.

PERSONAL CARE

  1. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Dove Soap): The advertisement claims that that Dove soap is smoother on skin than all other soaps. They tell people to check soap using litmus paper. The litmus paper turns blue in all cases except Dove soap. The litmus paper turns blue in case of other soaps as other soap is basic in nature. It was noted that showing a litmus test as an indicator for mildness with a voice over “litmus blue ho gaya” is misleading by implication. It was concluded that the reference to a litmus test to support the claim, “Harsh nahi, gentle chuniye” was not substantiated adequately, and is misleading.

  1. Biotique (Biotique bio kelp Shampoo): The advertisement’s claims, “Clinically tested”, “97 percent reported thicker, fuller, stronger and faster growing hair” and “Thicker, fuller, healthier hair”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy for the product, and are misleading.

  1. Nivea India Pvt. Ltd. (Nivea Whitening Cell Repair Body Lotion): The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Tan Free Skin just in 2 weeks”, was not substantiated with proof of efficacy for the product, and is misleading.

  1. Vini Cosmetics Ltd. (White Tone Powder): It was concluded that the advertiser’s TVC was similar to the complainant’s earlier run advertisement in general layout, copy, visual presentations, execution, demographics, and colour scheme, so as to suggest plagiarism.

  1. Leeford Healthcare Ltd. (Meglow Fairness Cream for Men): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Get Radiant Fairness”, “Get Spotless Face”, “SPF 15 UVA”, and Pack claim, “Mega Dose Of Skin Whitening Concentrate”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. While the advertiser presented a clinical study report, in the context of other claims being objected to, the claim “Clinically certified formula” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication.

  1. Leeford Healthcare Ltd. (Meglow Fairness Cream for Women): The claims in the advertisement (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Get Radiant Fairness”, “Get Spotless Face”, Pack claim– “With UVA SPF 15”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. While the advertiser presented a clinical study report, in the context of other claims being objected to, the claim “Clinically certified formula” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication.

  1. Oshea Herbals (Oshea Sunblock Cream SPF 40): The advertisement’s claim, “India's Most Trusted Brand" had a mismatch in the certificate provided by the advertiser and the survey report provided by IBC infomedia Pvt ltd. The certificate states “Best Skin Care products” Category whereas the report mentions the category as “Herbal Skin care”. Hence, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission of mention of the specific category. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research. Further, the claims, “With Oshea Herbals UVSHIELD get Tan Free Glowing Skin”, “SPF Range “SPF 20, SPF 25, SPF  30, SPF 50” and “SPF 40”, were not substantiated with evidence of technical evaluation for measurement of SPF  factor in each product and proof of product efficacy and are misleading.

  1. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Clear Ice Cool Menthol Shampoo) : The advertisement’s claim (in Kannada), as translated into English, “Keep you fresh for 24 hours”, was not substantiated adequately, and is misleading in absence of any criteria of comparison.

  1. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Ponds Men Pollution Control Face Wash): The claim in the advertisement, “1000 X adsorption power”, is misleading by omission of the mention of the basis of comparison.

  1. Simla Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (Simco Herbal Shampoo): The advertisement’s claims, “5 Problem solver- Falling hair, dandruff, weak roots, premature greying, dull and lifeless hair”, “Herbal Shampoo with extra Conditioner” and “Herbal shampoo for your all hair needs”, were not substantiated with evidence of product benefits. Also, the claim, “Hair expert since 1948”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading.

CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES

  1. Aliya Shoes: The advertisement showcases the protagonist (a minor girl) sitting on the road side mending shoes. Hence it was concluded that the advertisement of Aliya shoes is encouraging / promoting child labour which is in violation of The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986.

 

  1. Zikimo Trends: The advertisement’s claim, “Full Mirror work Punjabi salwar kameez at Zikimo” and the visual representation of the product is false and misleading. While the product claimed to have mirror work, it appeared to have foil work and not mirror work.

 

  1. Letv (Leeco) (Lemax2): The advertisement’s claim, “Watch the bezels disappear Bezel-less design enters unchartered territory with Le Max2's triple anodic oxidation process to form an integrated whole - with no distinction between screen surface and phone exterior for a truly immersive viewing experience” read along with the visual of the product with no bezels is false and misleading as it did not resemble the actual product provided to the complainant that has bezels.

  1. com (Under Colors of Benetton trunks for men): The advertisement’s claim, “pack of 2 Under Colors of Benetton Black Trunk Rs.459”, read in conjunction with the visual showing only 1 pc of the product advertised, is false and misleading by ambiguity. It was also noted that the name ‘Under Colors of Benetton’ is not the same as the company ‘United Colors of Benetton’, hence this could also be a counterfeit/pass-off product.

  1. Aero Club Private Limited (Woodland Shoes & Apparels): The advertisement’s claim, “Flat 40% off” announces discount on MRP, where MRP includes all taxes and also is inclusive of VAT. Based on the calculations provided by the complainant, the net discount being offered works to only 31%. The “Flat 40% off” claim is misleading by ambiguity as the discount is being calculated on a reference price which is inclusive of VAT and VAT is in any case being added post discount.

EDUCATION

The CCC found following claims in the advertisements by 66 different advertisers were not substantiated and, thus, violated ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions. Hence complaints against these advertisements were UPHELD.

  1. Chennais Amirthas Institute of Hotel Management: The advertisement’s (voice over) claims, “Now what you all will be seeing is our Chennais Amirthas infrastructure”, and the visual showing the infrastructure of the institute are misleading. Also, the voice over claims of “100” Job”, “Rs.10, 000/- salary during the course of studies” and “overseas employment after graduation”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence.

  1. K. University: The advertisement of P.K. University does not show actual image of the advertised institute. The picture portrays a grand structure similar to Mysore Palace, which is false and grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Clause 4c of the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs (“Visual of Infrastructure of the Institution shown in Advertisement shall be real and existing at the time of ad’s release”)
  2. Parul University: The advertisement’s claim, “10,000 + Placements in 500 + Industries”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. Further the claim, “Recognized by UGC, New Delhi”, was not substantiated with supporting proof.  Also, this claim is misleading as the UGC website shows that the compliance to UGC visit by UGC expert committee is still pending as substantiated by the complainant.
  3. Galaxy Global Group of Institutions: The advertisement’s claim, “Ranked No.1 Engineering College of Haryana”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as comparative data versus other similar institutes, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claim was not qualified to mention the year and source of ranking and category under which the school was ranked in the survey. Also the claim, “Upto Rs. 15 Lakh Package p.a.”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that the students have availed the claimed salary packages, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration.

  1. Vishaka Study Circle: The advertisement’s claims, “You Learn 100% or get Back Fee”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of students learning successfully or getting their fees back as advertised, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration.
  2. Rao Pahlad Singh Group of Institutions: The advertisement’s claims, “40 NDA selections”, and “94 AIPMT selections”, were not substantiated with authentic supporting data, and are misleading. Also the claim, “affiliated to CBSE New Delhi”, was not substantiated with supporting proof, and is misleading. The data provided by the complainant establishes that not all schools in the group are affiliated to CBSE Delhi.

  1. Kanpur Institute of Technology: The advertisement’s claim, “Awards & Honors - Rated As Best Engineering & Management College in Uttar Pradesh”, was not adequately substantiated as the reference to “Private” was missing. Other certificates presented by the advertiser were certificates for the year 2013, 2014 and pertaining to Educational / Academic Excellence and could not be considered as support for the claim of the institute being the “Best”. Advertiser did not provide any claim support data for the pictures shown in the advertisement of the award received by the advertiser for the year 2015. The advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and omission of the mention of the specific category as well as source and date of research for the claim made. Also the claim in the advertisement, “402+ Placements in 92+ Companies”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data (such as batch size of their students, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students), nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration.

  1. Info Edge India Ltd. (Shiksha.com): The advertisement’s claims, “India's No.1 Career & College Selection Platform”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes or any third party validation or research to prove this claim, and is misleading by exaggeration.

  1. Lovely Professional University: The advertisement’s claim, “100% Placements in MBA and Hotel Management”, was not adequately substantiated with relevant data (such as evidence of batch size, enrolment forms, and appointment letters received by the students etc.) nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity as the placement is subject to eligibility criteria. It also claims, “Packages of over Rs.20 lac”, which was not substantiated with evidence to conclusively prove that multiple students  were offered the claimed salary packages, and also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and implication that all  salary packages would be above Rs 20 lakhs.

  1. Lovely Professional University: The claim in the advertisement, “One of the Highest Placement Records in India”, was not substantiated with authentic evidence and/or validation by an independent third party, and is misleading by exaggeration.

  1. Sharda Education Trust (Sharda University): The advertisement’s claim, “Highest Package of Rs. 54 lac engineering”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that the students have availed the claimed salary package, and the claim is misleading ambiguity regarding the overseas employment.

  1. Akbar Academy of Airline Studies: The advertisement’s claim, “World Wide Top 10”, was not substantiated for the current year and is misleading by omission. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of reference and the criteria under which the advertiser was given the award. For the claim, “World’s No.1 Travel Training Institute Internship in major Airports”, was not adequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity due to reference to “Major airports”.  The advertisement also claims, “World’s No.1 IATA Authorised Training Centre”. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of reference. Also the claim, “100% Job Assistance”, “100%” numerical claim is not relevant for “job assistance” claim and it is misleading by implication.

  1. Jetking Infotrain Ltd. (Jetking Computer Education): The advertisement’s claims, “Join with jetking & get 100% job”, “100% job placement Guarantee”, “100% Job Guarantee”, were not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for independent verification, enrolment forms, the batch size of the students per year, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also claims, “India's no.1 computer hardware & networking institute”, was not substantiated with any award confirming its “No.1” status or with comparative data versus other similar institutes, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Limca Book of Record for 11,451 placements in one year” was substantiated for year 2011-12; the claim is not qualified to mention the source and year of award. This claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission. Further for the claim “India's most Reliable institute award 2014” the certificate is for the brand “Jetking being India’s most reliable institute award 2014” and not each institute under it. Hence this claim is misleading. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source of research. There is a mismatch of text used in the award versus advertisement.  Hence the claim is misleading by ambiguity. Although the claim, “Most  Trusted Brand in Computer hardware training by the Brand Trust Report” was substantiated, the claim is not qualified to mention the year of the award. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission of this being a 2014 data.

  1. Pearl Academy: The advertisement’s claim, “Admissions open for UG, PG and Diploma Programs” and reference to Interior Architecture, is misleading by ambiguity and implication as UG and PG courses cannot happen without certification and affiliation to any University.

  1. Anand International College of Engineering: The advertisement’s claim “No.1 Private Engineering College of Rajasthan”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also the claim, “This year Anand college has successfully placed 97% students seeking placement and is in the process of placing the remaining 93% students”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration.

 

  1. Chennais Amirta International Institute of Hotel Management: The advertisement’s claims, “Gives employment before degree”, was not substantiated with relevant data (such as batch size of students per year, their enrolment forms, detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for independent verification, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is therefore misleading by gross exaggeration.

  1. RedBricks Education: The advertisement’s claim, “British Council - International School Award 2014-2017”, was not qualified to mention the source, date when the award was granted and category for which the institute was given the award and was considered to be misleading by ambiguity. Based on the feedback from the British Council International School Award (ISA), the advertisement also appears to be in violation of the ISA guidelines.

  1. Geetanjali Centre of Excellence: The claim (in Gujarati), as translated in English, “100% Guarantee of Getting Pass”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration.

  1. Career Benchmark Academy:  The claim, “100% success or fee refund Guarantee”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration.

Complaints against advertisements of all educational institutes listed below mostly are UPHELD because of unsubstantiated claims that they ‘provide 100% placement/AND/OR they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields’.

  1. L. Bajaj Group of Institutions - G. L. Bajaj Institute of Technology and Management, Accurate Group of Institutions (Accurate Institute of Management & Technology), Adesh Institute of Technology, I.T.S Education Group , Swift Group Of Institutions - Swift Academy Of Design, CEDP Skill Institute, Malabar College of Engineering and Technology, ABS Foundation , Amrita University, IIHT Networks (Indian Institute of Hardware Tec), Sathyabama University, NRT India, IAM Business School, E Mould Education Centre, Mahatma Gandhi Mission (Institute of Hotel Management and Catering Technology), VPMM Education Trust  (V.P.Muthaih Pillai Meenakshi Ammal, Sobhasaria Janakalyan Trust ( Sobhasaria Group of Institution), Mother Teresa Group Of College- (Mother Teresa School of Nursing), Dronacharya Institute of Engineers Private Limited, Immanueak Arasar Group of Institution (Immanuel Arasar JJ College of Engineering), Sri Adichunchanagiri Shik Trust (Sri Adichunchanagi College Of Pharmacy), Patanjali IAS Classes, Jaya Group Of Institutions (Jaya College of Arts & Science), Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd (Frankfinn Institute Of Air Hostess Training) , Sophia Group Of College (Sophia Homeopathic Medical College & Sophia Nursing College), Nikita International School, Madras Institute of Engineering Technology (TMG College of Hotel Management & Catering), Ram Animation Studio Pvt. Ltd., Ambition Institute, Alliance Solutions, Gobindapur Polytechnic College, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation (K. L University), Mahamaya Industrial Training Centre, Centre for Bioinformatics, Maharana Pratap Group of Institutions  (Maharana Pratap Dental College & Hospital), Kukreja Institute of Hotel Management & Catering Technology, R N S Institute of Technology, SRM University (Srm Institute Of Hotel Management), Nexus Institute of Hotel Management, Hindustan Air Academy, Made Easy, Mahamaya Industrial Training Centre, GT Group of Companies (GT Infortech), PDM Religious & Education Association  (PDM Institute of Engineering & Technology), Sankara Institute of Management Science, Sri Shakthi Institute of Engineering & Technology Campus, Oriental Group of Educational Institutions, D P R Charitable Trust (VITS College of Engineering), Hans Worldwide Logistics and Uttaranchal Open University.

OTHERS

  1. Trikhaldarshi Masaliya Aghori Bapu (Icchadari Vashikaran): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati), as translated into English, “Solution in 1 hour with 1000% guarantee (He makes impossible, possible)”, “Established since years and well-known, settled Solution for A TO Z problems”, “Double gold medalist, famous world over, king of tantra-mantra”, “Having many years’ experience”,  “Eliminator of thousands of people’s suffering. Miracle of Girnar’s ascetic”, “Love problem, discord between husband and wife, problem with children, objects related to sorcery, Possibility of going abroad, divorce, one-sided love, getting rid of enemy, NRI problem, profit in business, land-property, debt-recovery, instant solution to all kinds of problems”, “Problem in going abroad, getting green card”, “Result at first attempt”, were not substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration.  Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
  2. Dr. Sneh's Mind Power (Mind power workshop): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “attending this program you get freedom from- Depression, body diseases, negative thoughts, anger, stress and misunderstanding”, “Progress in job/business”, “sweetness in relationship”,  “'20 Lac Indians benefited'”, were not substantiated with authentic scientific evidence and are misleading by exaggeration.

  1. SpiceJet Ltd.: The complaint was pertaining to the in-flight meal served by SpiceJet Ltd. and the mismatch of the product visual in the advertisement on the website and the actual product served to the complainant. It was concluded that the visual of the product shown on the product packaging and on the website did not resemble the actual product in the box served to the complainant and is misleading.

  1. Mahagun Group (Mahagun Housefull offer): The advertisement’s claims, “Price starts 68.37 lacs onwards”, “Move into a fully furnished home at no extra cost”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who have availed of this offer. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration.
  2. State Bank of India (SBI Quiz Contest): During the telecast of Kabaddi matches State Bank of India was advertising for their Home loan and Car loan. During these advertisements, viewers are asked to participate in SBI Quiz Contest by sending an SMS with correct answer to number 567676. The lucky winner would win a Moto g turbo phone. It was noted that the Advertiser did not provide any details regarding the modality of the contest (details of the contest, process followed, details of winners etc.) to prove that the “SBI Home and Car loan quiz contest” is genuine. Also, the contest was misleading by omission of the mention of date of execution and the date of announcements of winners of the contest. The advertiser has not stated clearly all material conditions so as to enable the consumer to obtain a true and fair view of their prospects in such activities.
  3. TimesJobs.com (India’s most loved CEO): The context of the advertisement for Timesjob, the protagonist in the advertisement (TVC) saying “I spent some time with the CEO and got a promotion”, is suggestive, objectifies women and indecent in the depiction of woman which is likely, in the light of generally prevailing standards of decency, to cause grave and widespread offence. In the context of the advertisement for Timesjob, the woman shown in another (print) advertisement saying “My CEO is the only person who wants to give me raise”, and in the other advertisement saying, “I spent some time with the CEO and got a promotion”, are suggestive, objectify women and indecent in the depiction of women which is likely in the light of generally prevailing standards of decency to cause grave and widespread offence.
  4. Tata Housing Development Company Limited (TATA Value Homes): In the advertisement, the base price quoted for the 1.5 BHK Unit is misleading as the total cost of the flat is higher than that advertised (Ad claims, “Price Range Rs.18.44 lac onwards 1.5 BHK, 1 BHK, 2.5 BHK, 2 BHK”).
  5. The KCP Limited (KCP Cement): The advertisement (in Tamil) showing an image of Prakasam Barrage was misleading by implication as the usage of KCP cement for its construction was not substantiated.
  6. Magic Bricks Services Ltd. Reality: The advertisement on Magic Bricks Services Ltd. Reality for Nausheen Real Estate of 2BHK Flat in Bangalore for Rs. 29.7 Lac, is false and misleading as the same currently does not exist and has already expired.
  7. Springfit Marketing Inc. (Springfit Mattress): The advertisement’s claims, “Unique combination of 3D Airtech fabric, springs and reactive foam spreads weight evenly across the mattress, promising ideal support for your back and a peaceful nights sleep for you”, were not substantiated with technical data, test report, product specification details to prove uniqueness and are misleading.
  8. KSL Digital Ventures Limited (Roof and Floor): The advertisement regarding 1BHK Apartment Prestige Sunrise Park in Bangalore for Rs.26.77 Lakhs, is false, misleading, and was not substantiated to prove that this offer is indeed available as advertised. Also, the property advertised of Prestige North Point Apartment for sale in Bangalore at Rs. 81.35 Lakhs, is false, misleading, and was not substantiated with supporting evidence to prove that this offer is indeed available as advertised
  9. Jagran Prakashan Limited (Dainik Jagran): The advertisement’s claim, “Touching / Reaching 100 Million Indians”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “ASCI has certified Dainik Jagran to be No.1 Newspaper in UP”, is misleading as ASCI is not a certifying body, and they have not given permission to use their name in the advertisement. Further “ABC has certified it to be No.1 Newspaper in UP”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence such as ABC certification supporting the claim as it appears in the advertisement, and is misleading.
  10. Air Asia India Limited: The advertisement’s claims, “World's Airline Winner Skytrax Awards 2015”, was not substantiated with supporting proof. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of reference and the category under which the airline was given the award. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission. Further the claim, “World's Best Low-Cost Airline 7 Years Running”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar airlines over the last seven years, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim.
  11. Voltas Ltd. (Voltas All Star A/C): The advertisement’s claim, “Using this AC leads to Less Load and More Savings”, was inadequately substantiated.
  12. Bookaddda.com: The price claim of the book Peadiatric Nursing by R.S.Tambulwadker on Bookaddda.com, “Rs. 491 less Discount Rs. 25 (5 % off) i.e. Net Rs. 466” and the claim that the “book is out of stock”, is false and misleading.
  13. Tata Sky Limited: The advertisement on Tata Sky Limited’s Website about their offer claiming “semi-annual” plan but offering it only for 180 days and not 182 days is incorrect and misleading by implication.
  14. Bajaj Capital Ltd. (National Pension System): The mention of "A Govt. of India Initiative" in the emailer advertisement is false and grossly misleading as it is made to appear like a government advertisement.
  15. Manju Groups: The advertisement’s claim that the project is “CMDA Approved”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading.
  16. Enterr 10Televisions Pvt. Ltd. (Bhojpuri Cinema): The advertisement’s claims, “Irrefutable Leader of UP, Bihar & Jharkhand” and “No.1 Bhojpuri channel in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar & Jharkhand”, were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertiser has referred to BARC data as a source for their claims. It was noted that as per “BARC India Ratings – Principles of Fair and Permissible Usage” the period of comparison for any claim of leadership should cover at least four consecutive weeks of data. However, as per the disclaimer put by the advertiser for the claims is based on single week (week 28’16) and not four consecutive weeks of data as per BARC. Therefore it is violative of BARC Principles.
  17. Sistema Shyam TeleServices Limited (MTS): The advertisement’s claim, “80% extra recharge with Rs. 499 and get 9GB usage instead of 5GB for 28 days. Extra benefit credited within 72 hrs.”, was not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who have availed this offer. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration.
  18. The Third Eye: The advertisement’s claims, “100% Money Back Guarantee” and “Brain Course Activation - A child when Blindfolded can do the Following - Identify Colors - Book Reading - Cycling – Skating - Play Chess - Reading Headlines of A Newspaper”, was not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence, and are grossly misleading.
  19. Tslc Pte Ltd. (Cash-e): The claim in the advertisement, “cash giving app” in the context of the advertisement is misleading by ambiguity and implication as the advertiser is providing “loan” and not “Cash” as would be commonly understood by a lay consumer post seeing the TVC.
  20. Videocon Industries Ltd. (Videocon Titanium Refrigerator): The claim in the advertisement, "World's only refrigerator with a deep freezer" was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration as there are other brands having deep freezer temperature close to that of the advertised product., thus, it is not conclusively proven that the advertised product is the “World’s only” refrigerator with a deep freezer .
  21. Videocon Industries Ltd. (Videocon Air Conditioners): The advertisement claims, “More than 500 models to choose from”, is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration as the term “model” implies that one model differs from another in terms of technology and/or design. However, different colour, per se, cannot be considered as a differentiator for “model”. Same model in different colour would be considered as a “colour variant”. Hence counting such variants as models is incorrect. Further the claim, “5-year comprehensive warranty” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim “100% copper condenser” is false and is misleading and the claim of “Gold fin evaporator” was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement also claims “Auto clean (blow function)” which was not substantiated adequately and is misleading.
  22. Tata Sky Limited: As the promotion of product or services via Website, too, is considered as Advertising and in ASCI’s purview, it was noted that the product pack is being advertised as My 99; however, the consumer can not avail the same at Rs 99 as it is necessary for him to buy Add on pack. It was concluded that the claim, “My 99 - Rs.99 per month” is misleading by ambiguity.
  23. ICICI Bank Ltd. (Coral Credit Card): The advertisement’s claim offer, "2 complimentary movies every month under the Buy One Get One offer through www.bookmyshow.com.” was substantiated, but the claim is misleading by omission of the qualifying criteria on the same web-page.

Info@Bestmediainfo.com

Post a Comment