This week, NAD announced a decision in a dispute between Owlet and Nanit, two companies that make smart baby monitors. Although the decision covers a lot of ground, today we’ll just focus on a topic that regularly comes up across many industries—popularity claims. Specifically, we’ll look at what NAD had to say about Nanit’s claims that its products were the “most loved,” “#1 most loved,” “internet’s favorite,” and “most awarded.”
“Most Loved” and “Favorite” Require Proof
Nanit first argued that claims such as “most loved,” “#1 most loved,” and “internet’s favorite” were puffery, but NAD rejected that argument, holding that a reasonable consumer would expect these types of claims to be supported by objective evidence.
Nanit then attempted to substantiate the claims using Amazon reviews, arguing that Amazon is the dominant smart-monitor marketplace and that reviews from other retailers corroborate customer preferences. NAD rejected this substantiation for several reasons. Here are two highlights worth noting:
- To establish that a product is rated #1 within a broad product category, an advertiser should generally compare itself to at least 85% of the relevant marketplace. Nanit did not demonstrate that Amazon reviews are representative of the marketplace.
- NAD believes that consumer preference claims connote that consumers have made an identifiable product choice between two or more products based upon particular product attributes. Reviews alone may not be enough to support that.
As a result, NAD recommended that Nanit stop making its “most loved,” “#1 most loved,” and “internet’s favorite” claims, while noting that nothing prevents the company from making accurate claims about reviews appearing on specific platforms.
Not all Awards are Equal
Owlet also challenged Nanit’s claim that it was the “most awarded” baby monitor. Although Nanit submitted a list of awards from parenting and technology publications, NAD focused on the ambiguity of the word “award.” Awards can range from rigorous evaluations by established publications to inclusion on internet “best of” lists or even pay-to-play recognitions, making it difficult for consumers to understand what is actually being counted.
To support this type of claim, third-party rankings must be independent, impartial, and based on consumer-relevant criteria. Because Nanit’s claim relied on awards with varying standards and methodologies, NAD found the evidence insufficient to support the superiority message conveyed by the claim.
NAD therefore recommended that Nanit stop making the “most awarded” claim. At the same time, NAD made clear that Nanit could accurately reference specific awards it received and discuss its collective recognition in a truthful and non-misleading manner.
Takeaway
Popularity claims are always going to be…well…popular with advertisers. And they’re always going to be unpopular with companies on the losing end of the comparison. Don’t assume that reviews, ratings, and award counts are enough to support those claims. This decision demonstrates that NAD will look beyond the numbers. Advertisers should be prepared to show that their evidence is representative of the relevant market and based on reliable methodology.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]