Advertising Claims Support  |  9am - 10am

​

Topics

• Introduction and scope of the course

• Claims support in product/brand development

• Admissibility of expert testimony

• Surveys in false advertising and trademark cases

• Efficacy, perception, and materiality

Claims and False Advertising; Internal Counsel Perspective  |  10:10am - 11am

​

Topics

• Three ways an ad can be false

• A typical false advertising lawsuit

• Puffery, falsity, and injury: The Procter & Gamble Co. vs. Kimberly-Clark (2008), Schick vs. The Gillette Co. (2005), The Procter & Gamble Co. vs. Ultreo, S.D.N.Y. (2008)

• To sue, challenge, or negotiate - an internal counsel’s perspective

Regulatory and ASTM Sensory Claims Guide  |  11:10am - Noon

​

Topics

• Regulatory actions and cases

• Review of the ASTM Claims Guide

  • Evolution of the Guide content​

  • Choosing a target population, product selection, sampling and handling, selection of markets

  • Claims: Superiority, unsurpassed, equivalence, and non-comparative

NAD Mock Hearings; Overview of the NAD  |  1pm - 3pm

​

Topics

• NAD Mock Hearing #1: MillerCoors - Miller Lite vs Bud Light

• NAD Mock Hearing #2: General Mills - Yoplait vs Chobani

• Advertising self-regulation and the NAD process

• Preparing for an NAD hearing
  1) NAD Case #5129 (2009) MillerCoors, LLC (Miller Lite Beer)
  2) NAD Case #5715 (2014) General Mills Inc. (Yoplait Blended Greek Yogurt)

Test Method, Design, Location, and Participants |  9am - 10am

​

Topics

• Test options: Monadic, sequential, direct comparisons

• Test design issues: Within-subject, matched samples, position and sequential effects, replication

• Choosing a testing location and test subjects
  3) NAD Case #5425 (2012) Church & Dwight Co., Inc.
  (Arm & Hammer® Sensitive Skin Plus Scent)
  4) NAD Case #5782 (2014) The MOM brands Company (Malt-O-Meal Cereals)
  5) NAD Case #6041 (2016) Unilever United States, Inc. (Suave Essentials Body Wash)

Sensory and Hedonic Methods |  10:10am - 11am

​

Topics

• Methods: Difference, descriptive, hedonic

• Data: Counts, ranking, rating scales

• “Better” and “Greater”, hedonic, sensory, and technical claims

• Attribute interdependencies
  6) NAD Case #5866 (2015) Kimberly-Clark Corp. (Huggies Natural Care Wipes)
  7) NAD Case #5874 (2015) and NARB Panel #207 (2016) Chattam, Inc. (Nasacort)
  8) NAD Case #5984 (2016) French’s Food Company (French’s Tomato Ketchup)

Consumer Relevance |  11:10am - Noon

​

Topics

• Setting action standards for consumer-perceived differences

• Linking expert and consumer data

• Clinical vs. statistical significance
  Litigated Case: (S.D.N.Y. 2012) Church & Dwight Co., Inc vs. Clorox Co. (cat litter)
  09) NAD Case #5974 (2010) Comcast Communications, Inc. (Xfinity Internet, Television & Telephone Services)
  10) NAD Case #6025 (2010) Bausch & Lomb, Inc. (PeroxiClear Contact Lens Peroxide Solution)
  11) NAD Case #6131 (2017) Too Faced Cosmetics, LLC. (Better Than Sex Mascara)

Survey Principles |  1pm - 2pm

​

Topics

• Answering questions

• Purpose of conducting surveys: Events and behaviors, attitudes and beliefs, subjective experiences

• How respondents answer questions: Optimizing and satisficing

• Filters to avoid acquiescence and no opinion responses

• Survey questions: Biased, open-ended vs. closed-ended

• Steps to improve survey questions

Consumer Perception Surveys |  2:10pm - 3pm

​

Topics

• A survey must include: Sample, design, questionnaire, analysis

• Reliability and validity: Ecological, external, internal, face, construct

• Bias: Code, position

• Task instructions – importance and impact

• Data collection methods

• Target universe and size, controls, biased questions, improvements in design and analysis

• Design Issues: Monadic vs sequential monadic (within subject), separating open-ended questions from close-ended

• The stimulus is the label or ad, not the product itself

• Why open-ended questions are not a good basis for quantification

• Common design flaws

How NAD Has Ruled on Perception Surveys |  9am - 10am

​

Topics

• Consumer takeaway surveys: NAD perspective, critique of cases
  12) NAD Case #5849 (2015) T-Mobile USA (More Data Capacity)
  13) NAD Case #5926 (2016) Comcast Cable Communications (Xfinity Cable TV)
  14) NAD Case #6009 (2016) Epson America, Inc. (Epson EcoTank Supertank Printers)

Consumer Takeaway Survey Research |  10:10am - 11am

​

Topics

• Independent research on the Bayer Advanced fertilizer case
  15) NAD Case #6033 (2016) Bayer CropScience US (Bayer Advanced 3-in-1 Weed and Feed for Southern Lawns)

Analysis - Interpretation and Communication |  11:10am - 12pm

​

Topics

• Hypothesis testing

• Determining statistical significance and confidence bounds

• Communicating claim requirements to the business side
  16) NAD Case #5569 (2013) InterHealth Nutraceuticals (Zychrome Dietary Supplement)
  17) NAD Case #5755 (2014) The Procter & Gamble Co. (Olay Sensitive Body Wash)
  18) NAD Case #6236 (2018) Abbott Nutrition (Similac Human Milk Fortifier)
  Litigated Case: (S.D.N.Y. 1994) Avon Products vs. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
  (Skin-So-Soft)

Test Power |  1pm - 2pm

​

Topics

• The meaning of power

• Planning experiments and reducing cost

• Sample sizes for claims support tests

• Managing Risks: Advertiser claim, competitor challenge
  19) NAD Case #6065 (2017) Shell Oil Co. (Shell V-Power NiTRO+ Premium Gasoline)
  20) NAD Case #6164 (2018) The Proctor & Gamble Co. (Finish® Quantum® Max Automatic Dishwasher Detergent)

Handling No Difference/No Preference Responses |  2:10pm - 3pm

​

Topics

• No preference option analysis

• Power comparisons: Dropping, equal and proportional distribution

• Statistical models and psychological models

• ASTM recommendation
  21) NAD Case #5453 (2012) Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. (Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice)
  22) NAD Case #6037 (2016) Mizkan America, Inc. (RAGU Homestyle Traditional Sauce)

Testing for Equivalence and Unsurpassed Claims |  9am - 10am

​

Topics

• How the equivalence hypothesis differs from difference testing

• ASTM requirements for an unsurpassed claim

• The paradox of finding support for superiority, unsurpassed, and equivalence; the need for a minimum standard for superiority

• FDA method for qualifying generic drugs: The TOST
  23) NAD Case #5609 (2013) Starbucks Corp. (Verismo Single-Serve Coffee System)
  24) NAD Case #5822 (2015) Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC (Huggies® Little Snugglers Diapers)
  25) NAD Case #5829 and NARB Panel #202 (2015) Bayer HealthCare, LLC (Claritin and Claritin-D)

Ratio, Multiplicative, and Count-Based Claims |  10:10am - 11am

​

Topics

• The difference between ratio and multiplicative claims

• Examples of multiplicative claims

• Count-based claims (e.g.,“9 out of 10 women found our product reduces wrinkles”)
  26) NAD Case #5107 (2009) Ciba Vision Corp. (Dailies Aqua Comfort Plus)
  27) NAD Case #5416 (2012) LG Electronics USA, Inc. (Cinema 3D TV & 3D Glasses)
  28) NAD Case #5484 (2012) Reynolds Consumer Products (Hefty® Slider Bags)
  29) NAD Case #5779 (2014) S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. (Scrubbing Bubbles Heavy Duty Cleaner with fantastik & Scrubbing Bubbles Bleach 5-in-1 All Purpose Cleaner with fantastik)
  30) NAD Case #5934 (2016) Rust-Oleum Corp. (Painter’s Touch Ultra Cover 2X Spray Paint)

“Up To” Claims and Conclusion |  11:10am - 12pm

​

Topics

• Definition and support for an “up to” claim

• FTC opinion on windows marketers claim

• “Up to” energy savings claim at the NAD
  31) NAD Case #5876 (2015) The Procter & Gamble Co. (Duracell Coppertop & Duracell Quantum Alkaline Batteries)