Popular Topics
All Topics
- .Com Disclosure Guide
- 140conf
- 140conf Long Island
- 140confLI
- 47 USC 230
- AAA
- ACI 2017
- Ads
- Advance Registration
- Advertising
- Advertising Agencies
- Advertising Agency
- Advertising Disclosure
- Advertising Industry
- Advertising Injury
- Advertising Law
- Advertising Practice
- advertising self-regulation
- Advertising Self-Regulatory Council
- Advertising Software
- Advertising, Marketing & Promotions News
- Advertorials
- Advisory
- Affiliate Marketing
- Affiliate Program
- AG
- All Natural
- Amazon
- Amazon Silk
- Amazon Tax
- Amazon.com
- Amendments
- American Advertising Federation
- American Bar Association
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Android
- Annual Audit
- Annual Fee
- anti-fraud
- App Developers
- Apple
- Apps
- Arbitration
- Arbitration Clause
- Arbitration Rules
- Ashley Madison
- ASRC
- AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion
- ATDS
- Attorney
- Attorney General
- Audio Beacons
- Augme
- Auto-dial
- Automatic Renewal
- Automobiles
- BBB AdTruth
- Bead Art Playsets
- Behavioral Advertising
- Best Lawyers
- Blackberry
- Bloggers and Influencers
- Bloomberg BNA
- Brain Training
- Branding
- Brands
- Breach
- Burden of Proof
- Business Law
- Business, Marketing & Promotions News
- Buyers
- California
- California Auto-Renewal Task Force
- California Consumer Privacy Act
- California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
- California’s Automatic Renewal Law
- California’s Unfair Competition Law
- Campaigns
- CAN-Spam
- Cancer Fund of America
- cannabis
- Caribbean & Latin American Corporate Counsel Summit 2017
- CARU's Guidelines
- CAS
- Cash prizes
- CASL
- CBBB
- CBD
- Celebrities
- Celebrity Images
- Cell Phone Applications
- Cell phones
- CFPB
- CGMP
- Chambers 2017 USA Guide
- Chambers USA 2022 Guide
- Chantal Tode
- Charge Pop-ups
- Charity Fundraising
- Charity Regulators
- Children's Advertising
- Children's Advertising Review Unit (CARU)
- children's marketing
- Children's Privacy
- Civil Penalties
- Class Action
- Class Action Lawsuit
- Class Certification
- Clean Diesel
- Cognitive Claims
- College Athletes
- Colorado
- Commerce Department
- Commercial Advertising
- Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA)
- Communications Decency Act
- compliance
- conference
- Consumer Complaints
- Consumer Complaints List
- Consumer Contracts
- Consumer Data
- Consumer Data Protection Act (“CDPA”)
- Consumer Finance Protection Board
- Consumer Fraud
- Consumer Fraud Act
- consumer health guidelines
- Consumer Privacy
- Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights
- Consumer Protection
- consumer protection laws
- Consumer Sentinel Network
- Contract
- COPPA
- COPPA FTC Olshan Advertising Marketing Promotions Privacy
- Copyright Act
- Copyright Alert System
- Copyright Infringement
- Copyright Infringement Abroad
- Copyright, Trademark and Other Intellectual Property
- Corporate Law
- Council of Better Business Bureau
- Counterclaims
- Court Decisions
- COVID-19
- Cramming
- Credit Card Payment Surcharges
- Crowdfunding
- Cryptocurrency
- cybersecurity
- D.C. Circuit Court
- Daily Fantasy Sports Contests
- dark patterns
- data breach
- Data Broker
- Data Collection Practices
- Data Protection
- Data Security
- Data Transfers
- Debt collectors
- Deceptive Advertising
- Deceptive Pricing
- Deceptive Tracking
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Labor
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- dietary supplements
- Digital
- Digital Advertising
- Digital Media
- Direct listings
- Direct Marketers
- Direct marketing programs
- Direct response marketing
- DirectTV
- Disclosure
- Disclosure Obligations
- Disclosure Rules
- Discounts
- DMA
- DMCA
- Do Not Call
- Do Not Track
- DOJ
- Domain Extensions
- Domino's Pizza
- Dot Com Disclosures
- DPPA
- DraftKings
- Drawing By Chance
- Ecommerce
- Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act
- Emissions Testing
- endorsement
- Enforcement Action
- Enhanced Ads
- Entry Fee
- EPA
- Epic
- Estoppel
- Ethics
- EU Commission
- EU-US Privacy Shield
- European Commission
- European Court of Justice (ECJ)
- European Union
- European Union registration holders
- European Union Trademark
- Exchange listing
- Ezor
- Factory outlets
- Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)
- Fair Debt Collections Practices Act
- Fair Information Practice Principles
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- false advertisement
- False Advertising
- FanDuel
- Fantasy Contests Act
- Fantasy Sports
- Fantasy Sports Operators
- Farm Bill
- fashion law
- Fax broadcsters
- Faxes
- FCC
- FCC Developments
- FCC Solicited Fax Rule
- FDA
- FDCA
- Federal Laws & Regulations
- Federal Overtime Regulations
- Federal Trade Commission
- Final Rule
- FIPP
- First Amendment
- Fit Products
- Fit Tea
- Florida
- Force Majeure
- Fraud
- FTC
- FTC Act
- FTC Chair
- FTC Guidance
- FTC restitution
- FTC’s Jewelry Guides
- Gambling
- Gambling Laws
- Game Promotions
- GDPR
- General Data Protection Regulation
- Geo-targeted Advertising
- Georgia
- government sanctions
- Guide
- HARO
- Health-related Mobile Apps
- Health-related Products
- Healthy
- HIPAA
- History Sniffing
- HitPath
- Homestead Laws
- HTC
- Hurricane
- IAB
- ICANN
- illegal content
- Illegal Gambling
- Illinois
- IMDb
- Influencer Marketing
- Injury in Fact
- Insider Trading
- Inspection Resources
- Insurance Company
- Insurance Coverage
- INTA
- Intellectual Property
- internet
- Internet and Privacy Law
- iOS
- Iowa
- IP Awareness Assessment Tool
- IPOs
- Jeff Pulver
- Jewelry
- JOLT
- Jurisdiction
- Kindle Fire
- Lanham Act
- Law
- Law Enforcement
- Law Review Article
- law school
- Laws
- lawsuit
- Leading Lawyers
- Lee Bogner
- Legal 500 United States 2017
- Legal opinions
- Legislation
- Licensing Fees
- Lily Robotics
- List managers
- Litigation
- Lumosity
- Lumosity ads
- Lumosity games
- Lustigman Firm
- Luxury Daily
- made in the usa
- Magazine publishers
- Mail Order Sales Rule
- Manufacture
- Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price (“MSRP”)
- Marden-Kane
- Marketing
- Marketing & Promotions News
- Marketing and Advertising Law
- Marketshare
- Mass texts
- Material Disclosures
- Mc Donalds
- Media and Entertainment
- Media Companies
- Microsoft
- MLM
- Mobile Financial Services
- Mobile In-app Charges
- Mobile Marketer
- Mobile Marketing
- Mobile Payment Systems
- Mobile Payment Systems Security Programs
- Mortgage Bankers Association
- Mortgage Investors
- NAD
- NARB
- Native Advertising
- Native Advertising Guidelines
- Nautilus, Inc.
- NCAA
- Network Advertising Initiative
- New Jersey
- New Jersey Supreme Court
- New York
- New York Law Journal
- New York SHIELD Act
- New York’s Automatic Renewal Law
- NFT
- NIL
- Nomi
- Non-Commercial Calls
- Non-profit Organization
- Notice
- Nutrient Content
- NY Attorney General
- objective consumer harm
- Off-label Prescriptions
- Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
- Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
- Office of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC)
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Olshan
- Olshan Grundman
- Olshan News
- Online Advertising
- Online Apps
- Online Cancellation
- Online Contracts
- Online Discount Pricing
- Online Entertainment Co
- Online Retail
- Online Reviews
- Online Tracking
- Online travel agencies
- Overstock
- Paid Advertising
- Paid Promotions
- pandemic
- Patents
- Payment Methods
- Penny Auction
- Performance Marketing
- Personally Identifiable Information
- Pet Care
- Peter Shankman
- Pharmaceutical Advertising
- Pharmaceutical Manufacturers
- pre-orders
- Pre-recorded Message
- Price Match Guarantee
- Pricing Guides
- Pricing Practices
- Privacy
- Privacy Act
- Privacy Policy
- Privacy Practices
- Privacy Shield
- Pro-Consumer
- Products
- Professional Association for Customer Engagement (PACE)
- Promotion
- Promotions
- Proposed Rulemaking
- Public Database
- Publication of Age
- Publisher Magazine
- Q&A
- RCT Requirements
- Real Estate
- Real-estate-advertising
- Reasonableness
- Registration
- Regulations
- Resale Value
- Resignation
- Restrictions
- retail
- Retail Stores
- Revisions
- Risk
- Robocalls
- Roundtable
- Safe Harbor
- Sales
- Sales Practices
- Sales Tax
- Sandy
- SDNY
- SEC
- SEC disclosure
- SEC disgorgement
- SEC Form 10
- Section 17600 of the Business and Professions Code
- Securities Act
- Securities Act of 1933
- Securities Act Section 17(b)
- Securities Exchange Act of 1934
- self-regulatory
- Sellers
- Service-Mark Infringement
- Settlement
- Sex Offenders
- SilverPush Apps
- Skill Contest
- Skin Care Products
- Smartphone
- Social Media
- Social Media Accounts
- Social Media Marketing
- Social Media Posts
- Social Networking
- South Dakota
- Southern District of Florida
- Spam
- Special Olympics
- Spotify
- Staff Reshuffling
- State Law
- Statute of Limitations
- Subscribers' privacy rights
- Subscription Arrangements
- substantiation rules
- Super Lawyers
- Supreme Court
- Sweeping
- Sweepstakes Law
- Sweeptstakes Contest
- symposium
- Tasty
- TCCWNA
- TCPA
- TCPA Appeals
- TCPA Claim
- TCPA Class Actions
- TCPA Lawsuit
- TCPA Liability
- TCPA Regulation
- TCPA Ruling
- TCPA Violation
- Tech Companies
- Tech Day New York 2017
- Telecom Law
- Telemarketers
- Telemarketing
- Telemarketing Calls
- Telemarketing Law
- Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR)
- Telephone Consumer Act
- Terms & Conditions
- Text Message Ads
- Text Messages
- Text Messengers
- Textile Fiber Products Identification Act
- The 2017 ANA/BAA 39th Marketing Law Conference: Breakthrough: Legal Strategies for Dynamic Businesses
- The Americans with Disabilities Act
- The Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program
- The Kardashians
- The Pennsylvania Record
- Third Circuit Court
- Throttling
- Top Ten Complaints
- Trademark Clearinghouse
- Trademark Protection
- Trademark Rights
- Trademarks
- Transactions
- Transnational Criminal Organization (TCO
- Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty & Notice Act
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- Unauthorized Data
- United Kingdom
- Unsolicited Advertisement
- Unsubscribe Act of 2019
- US Supreme Court
- Use Tax
- Velti
- Vermont
- Vermont House Bill 593
- Vicarious Liability
- Violations
- virtual reality
- Wal-Mart v. Dukes
- Warning Letter
- Washington D.C.
- Washington Law
- Washington’s Consumer Protection Act
- WBO
- Web Agreements
- Web Browsers
- webinar
- webOS
- Websites
- Western District of Washington
- White House
- World Boxing Organization
Recent Posts
- Olshan Advertising and Branding Law Groups' Hot Topics - 2023
- Andrew Lustigman Quoted by Law360 on the FTC’s Consumer Protection Rulemaking and Enforcement in 2023
- New Privacy Laws in the United States for 2023
- Pay Me What You Owe Me: Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty Reaches Settlement with CART Over Autorenewal Practices
- NAD Examines Blue Apron’s “Canceling Meals is Easy” Claim
- Many Celebrities Named in Class-Action Lawsuits for Touting Cryptocurrency on Social Media
- Class Action Accuses Amazon Prime of “Dark Patterns”
- Authority of Consumer Finance Protection Board Is Now Less Certain
- FTC Seeks Comments on “Junk Fees” – Signaling a Renewed Focus on Supplemental Fees
- FTC Reaches $100 Million Settlement With Vonage Over Subscription Practices
Archives
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
Contact Us
212.451.2258
The Use of Consumer Perception Surveys in NAD Cases and How to Get Them Right
The use of consumer perception surveys before the National Advertising Division (“NAD”) is an important tool for advertisers who are challenging and defending advertisements. NAD often expresses a wish to see surveys in their opinions, and surveys are one way for NAD to determine the messages conveyed to consumers in advertisements. On December 7th, the Advertising Self-Regulatory Counsel (“ASRC”) hosted an informative conference on consumer perception surveys which gave insight into the use of such surveys before NAD over the last five years and guidance into what makes a good survey from experts and from the perspective of NAD.
In the first panel, statistics were presented about the use and acceptance of consumer perception surveys before NAD. Interestingly, consumer surveys are not used as much as one might expect in cases before NAD. Over the last five years, only 36 cases used one or more consumer perception surveys (about 8% of cases). Out of 52 surveys that were submitted, 42 were in support of the challenger and 10 were in support of the advertiser. Thus, given the low number of surveys that are presented to NAD, just submitting a survey could help to distinguish a company appearing before NAD, especially if your ad is the one being challenged.
However, if an advertiser is going to submit a survey, then it is important to work with counsel and an expert to get the survey right. Surprisingly, 62% of consumer perception surveys submitted to NAD were rejected for having no value. So where are advertisers going wrong? The most common reasons the surveys were rejected were because the survey used leading closed questions, there were issues with the control questions, an improper control stimulus, questionable coding of open-ended questions and inadequate or improper filtering. Other reasons were reliance on closed questions (open-end questions absent or ignored), biased presentation of test stimulus, wrong population, no control group or condition, the survey tested consumer beliefs rather than their perceptions of the ad, and there was no “don’t know” option.
In two subsequent panels, survey experts and NAD attorneys gave important guidance during the conference on what makes a good survey. NAD noted that it likes when the experts participate in NAD meeting to explain the survey and to be able to respond to critiques about the survey. NAD also noted that lawyers should not just give NAD a summary of the survey, instead NAD wants to see the actual report and data to aid in their decision.
The survey experts explained that the generally accepted survey structure contains (1) an appropriate sample in composition and size drawn from the population of interest; (2) a valid design with exactly matched cells, realistic presentation of stimulus, controls to account for bias and noise, and progression from open-ended to non-leading closed ended questions; (3) a questionnaire with unambiguous and unbiased questions and the use of appropriate filters for focused open-ended or closed-ended questions; and (4) competent statistical analyses.
NAD attorneys gave guidance on what they believe a reliable survey includes and listed the following factors: (1) an appropriate universe and representative sample; (2) a well-designed questionnaire; (3) clear and non-leading questions; (4) use of a proper control cell; (5) use of appropriate survey stimulus; (6) data analyzed with accepted practices; and (7) reliable survey methods and procedures. NAD attorneys noted that as a general rule, NAD has been persuaded by arguments that open-ended questions are better indicators of how consumers interpret a commercial message because respondents answers are not controlled by the suggestions contained in the questions themselves. They recommended that the survey begin with open-ended questions and filter down to more close-ended questions.
During the question and answer panel, some interesting topics were discussed. Among them, was the impact of technological advances on surveys. For instance, consumers (especially millennials) are using their mobile phones more often these days and it is often difficult for survey experts to get young consumers to respond to surveys in a timely manner when the survey needs to be done on a computer. NAD indicated that if there is evidence that consumers are viewing the advertisements on their mobile phones, then they might accept surveys that are done on mobile phones. NAD indicated that if survey experts deviate from the norm, then they need to have a good reason and NAD wants to know the reason. While there are potential issues with consumers taking the survey on their phones, such as how to deal with open-ended questions and how to ensure that consumers cannot move to the next question prior to answering as is the case with current controls, NAD will follow the standards set by the industry.
TAKEAWAY: Consumer perception surveys can be very beneficial in NAD cases when done correctly. Thus, when bringing or defending a case before NAD it is important for companies to consider whether a consumer perception survey is advisable and if so, for companies to work closely with their legal counsel and expert so that the survey is properly tailored to meet NAD’s standards.