General Mills, Welch’s Fruit Snacks clash over where the line is for humor and truth
“While humor may be used to highlight a truthful distinction between products, a humorous advertisement should not communicate a message that falsely disparages a competitor’s product,” the NAD determined in a challenge recently published publicly.
General Mills, which markets fruit-flavored snacks under its Mott’s and Annie’s brands, brought the television ads for Welch’s Fruit Snacks featuring celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay to the NAD via its Fast-Track SWIFT process for single-issue advertising cases. It argued the commercials suggest “a consumer is better off simply throwing other fruit snacks in the garbage versus eating them.”
In the ads, Ramsey, who is known for his hyperbolic criticism and abuse of that which he does not like, compares yellow boxes of “fruit flavored snacks” with Welch’s Fruit Snacks. In one ad, he declares “there’s barely any fruit” in the yellow box of fruit flavored snacks before he dropkicks the box so that it lands in a lobster tank. In another, he places a fruit flavored snack in his mouth before spitting it back into its yellow box, which he then throws out the window to the sound of shattering glass.
In both ads, he recommends that the consumers standing by him to buy Welch’s Fruit Snacks because they are made with whole fruit as the main ingredient, which makes them “the real deal.” The ads end with the tagline “Get the One with Whole Fruit” next to a box of Welch’s Fruit Snacks.
General Mills alleges the commercials send the message competing products are “worthless” as “emphasized through Ramsey’s consistent and unqualified abuse.”
Welch’s Fruit Snacks contain at least 50% whole fruit puree, meet minimum fiber requirements set by PIM Brands
PIM Brands countered that the ad “permissibly highlights the distinctions between Welch’s Fruit Snacks and other products in an entertaining and humorous manner.”
It explained its nine varieties of Welch’s Fruit Snacks contain at least 50% puree made from whole fruit, fruit puree is the predominant ingredient by weight in its products, and its puree has a minimum amount of fiber.
In contrast, it argued, competitors may use only pear puree or a juice concentrate and less total fruit content.
Where is the line for using humor to distinguish between attributes and products?
NAD agreed a “reasonable takeaway from the commercials is the whole fruit content of Welch’s Fruit Snacks makes it a superior or preferable product for consumers.”
But, it adds, the commercials “are not narrowly tailored to focus only on the product distinction that the Welch’s Fruit Snacks are made with fruit puree while others use fruit juice,” and in doing so oversteps the allowable use of humor to highlight truthful distinctions.
“Spitting, throwing and kicking a product for the lack of fruit or fruit flavoring conveys a message that those distinctions make the competing product worthless and are not merely statements on the relative merits of the products and their ingredients,” NAD explains in the decision.
“An inedible food product by definition has no value and the net impression of the commercials is that parents should not purchase a product that is garbage for their children,” it adds.
Therefore, it concludes, PIM Brands should discontinue the ads or modify them to avoid conveying competing products are “worthless.”
PIM Brands said it would comply with NAD’s recommendations but disagrees with its determination.
“PIM Brands incurs significant costs in producing Welch’s Fruit Snacks from quality whole fruit purees,” and including them as the main ingredient, it says in a statement included with the decision. “The commercials do no more than highlight this critical distinction in an entertaining and humorous manner.”
It adds that it believes “it is fair to highlight the differences for consumers” and does not believe that “advertising has to be stripped of humor when it is truthful and entirely accurate in highlighting those very important comparisons.”
