Consumer Law

The National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that The Clorox Co. (Clorox) modify unqualified parity claims for its line of Green Works household cleaning products. The Clorox Co., Green Works, (Case #4882 07/17/08). S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. challenged a number of claims, including claims that Green Works cleaning products "work as well as conventional cleaners" and "Green Works All-Purpose Cleaner cuts through this greasy mess as well as the leading spray cleaner." Both parties provided test data supporting their positions, which despite some imperfections, the NAD found valid and sufficiently reliable. Based on the results of these tests, the NAD found that Clorox could substantiate a claim that Green Works removes most kitchen soils as well as traditional cleaners, but not an unqualified claim because it did not perform as well in cleaning "tough grease." The NAD also found that Clorox could not substantiate an unqualified parity claim for Green Works bathroom cleaner, because in locations where water is harder, Green Works does not perform as well as traditional cleaners. Finally, the NAD found that the parity claims made by Clorox may imply to consumers that Green Works is a disinfectant, because over 90% of traditional cleaners also disinfect. The NAD found this "reasonable implication" even though Clorox does not make any claim that Green Works disinfects. I believe that this last finding is a bit of a stretch. I am not sure that consumers associate cleaning with disinfecting. In fact, based on my non-scientific, non-comprehensive review of product claims, even advertisers draw a distinction. See here and here.