Puffery
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Puffery as a legal term refers to promotional statements and claims that express subjective rather than objective views, such that no reasonable person would take literally. Puffery is especially featured in testimonials.
For instance, a diner advertisement promoting the “world’s best cup of coffee” would class as puffery. That claim would be almost impossible to substantiate, and no reasonable consumer would take such exaggeration at face value.
Puffery often uses the superlative form of a word, like “best”, “most”, “greatest”, etc. However, a company making a superlative claim such as “cheapest” or “safest” usually has to substantiate such competitive claims. Merchants must exercise extreme caution when making statements about the quality, condition, or facts about their products or services. A slight variation in wording may result in an express warranty.
The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) defined puffery as a “term frequently used to denote the exaggerations reasonably to be expected of a seller as to the degree of quality of his product, the truth or falsity of which cannot be precisely determined.” [1]
The FTC stated in 1984 that puffery does not warrant enforcement action by the Commission. In its FTC Policy Statement on Deception, the Commission stated: "The Commission generally will not pursue cases involving obviously exaggerated or puffing representations, i.e., those that the ordinary consumers do not take seriously."
The advertising world sometimes refers to puffery with the idiom gilding the lily.[2]
Contents |
[edit] Types of Puffery
Various types of puffery have been identified. They are Best, Best Possible, Better, Specially Good, Good, and Subjective Qualities.[3]
Best means alone at the top of the rankings. Unique. No competitor can match us. Examples: Nestlé makes the very best chocolate. Nobody gets the dirt out like Hoover. Related terms include finest, or more limited claims such as finest quality, most comfortable, longest lasting.
Best possible is not quite as strong. It allows for no competitors to be better, but does not rule out that the advertised item could be tied for first place with some. Examples: Perfect rice every time (Minute). Nothing cleans stains better than Clorox.
Better means better than some competitor(s), often with a qualification as to which, the latter allowing that others may be equal or even better themselves. Example: Advil works better. Many claims use the qualification by claiming to be better than some specified competitor(s).
Specially good includes claims such as great, extraordinary, elegant, thus high on the scale but with no comparison to competitors. If it's Weber it's great outdoors. Extraordinary elegance (Coty).
Good means just plain good, with no explicit reference to being specially so. M'm m'm good (Campbell's). You're in good hands with Allstate.
Subjective claims are those with no explicit quality or ranking words as in examples above, but with wording that may be taken as such by analogy, or through imagination, etc. Examples: There's a smile in every Hershey bar. Sexiest European (BMW).
The significance of these differences is that the higher the ranking, the stronger the claim, meaning the greater the comparison to the competition.
[edit] Puff piece
Puff piece is an idiom for a journalistic form of puffery; an article or story of exaggerating praise that often ignores or downplays opposing viewpoints or evidence to the contrary.[4]
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- Boudreaux, Donald J. (1995). "Puffery" in Advertising. Free Market, September 1995 Volume 13, Number 9.
- Preston, Ivan L. (1996). The Great American Blow-Up: Puffery in Advertising and Selling. University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 0-299-15254-5
- Foulke, Judith E. (1995) Cosmetic Ingredients: Understanding the Puffery. FDA Consumer, Publication No. (FDA) 95-5013.
- Hoffman, David A. (2006). The Best Puffery Article Ever. Iowa Law Review, Vol. 91, 2006
- DeFrancis, Victor F. (2004). Remembrance of Things Pasta: Circuit Addresses PufferyPDF (111 KiB). FTC Consumer Protection Update, Fall 2004.
- Federal Trade Commission Policy Statement on Deception, 103 F.T.C. 174 (1984), appended to Cliffdale Assoc. Inc., 103 F.T.C. 110 (1984).
- ^ Better Living, Inc. et al., 54 F.T.C. 648 (1957), aff’d, 259 F.2d 271 (3rd Cir. 1958).
- ^ Bartleby.com. Retrieved on 2006-07-22.
- ^ Ivan L. Preston, "A Problem Ignored: Dilution and Negation of Consumer Information by Antifactual Content," Journal of Consumer Affairs (Winter, 2002).
- ^ ""puff piece." Answers.com". The American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms. (1992). Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved on 2006-07-22.
