REPORT

ON
COMPETITIVE ADVERTISING

PRESENTED BY:APOORV BHARDWAJ C-11

AAKASH SHARMA C-23
PRATEEK SINGH C-39
CONTENTS

SR.NO.
1
2
3
4

TITLE
INTRODUCTION
REGULATORY BODIES
CASES RELATED TO COMPETITIVE ADVERTISING
COMPANY DETAILS

PAGE NO.
3
6
9
29

LIST OF FIGURES
SR.NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

TITLE
Classification of Competitive Advertising
Dove and Pantene
Print ad by Procter & Gamble India (P&G)
Print ad by HUL
Saffola vs Fortune
Kiwi vs Cherry Blossom
Coalgate vs Pepsodent
Rin vs Tide
Microsoft vs Google
company visiting card
Company reply

PAGE NO.
4
9
10
10
13
15
17
22
26
29
29

CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
2

ADVERTISING DEFINITION
Advertising is the non-personal communication of information usually paid for and usually
persuasive in nature about products, services or ideas by identified sponsors through the various
media. Bovee
"Advertising is a non-moral force, like electricity, which not only illuminates but electrocutes. Its
worth to civilization depends upon how it is used." J. Walter Thompson

COMPETITIVE ADVERTISING DEFINITION

Competitive advertising is commonly used type of advertising that communicates
the unique benefits of a product, differentiating it from the competition.
Competitive Advertising is advertising which points out features of a brand which
may not be available in other brands but does not directly name a competitor.
Competitive advertising is defined as advertising that compares alternative brands
on objectively measurable attributes or price, and identifies the alternative brands
by name, illustration or other distinctive information.
COMPARITIVE ADVERTISING DEFINITION
Comparative advertising is a type of advertising that seeks to make direct
comparison between a product and one or more of its competitors on features or
benefits that are important to the target market.
Comparative advertising identifies the competition for the purpose of claiming
superiority or enhancing perceptions of the sponsoring and usually lesser-known
brand.
Comparative Advertising is an advertising in which a firm names a competitor's
product and compares it with its own.

Classification of Competitive Advertising

Direct

Competiti
ve
Advertisin
g
Indire
ct
Figure 1: Classification of Competitive Advertising

Direct advertising is a form of advertising which allows businesses and nonprofit organizations
to communicate directly to customers through a variety of media including cell phone text
messaging, email, websites, online adverts, database marketing, fliers, catalog distribution,
promotional letters and targeted television, newspaper and magazine advertisements as well as
outdoor advertising. Among practitioners, it is also known as direct response.
Indirect advertising is a competition among the suppliers of different types of products that
satisfy the same needs. It is advertising intended to stimulate purchase of a particular brand at
some future time. For example, a pizza shop competes indirectly with a fried chicken shop, but
directly with another pizza shop.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPETITIVE ADVERTISING AND

COMPARITIVE ADVERTISING
4

S.No.

Comparative advertisement

Competitive advertisement

1.

Comparative advertising is a type of

advertising that seeks to make direct
comparison between a product and one
or more of its competitors on features
or benefits that are important to the
target market.

Competitive Advertising is a
commonly
used
type
of
advertising that communicates the
unique benefits of a product,
differentiating
it
from
the
competition.

2.

Comparative Advertising is a type of

advertising in which a firm names a
competitor's product and compares it
with its own.

Competitive Advertising is a
type of advertising which points
out features of a brand which may
not be available in other brands

3.

Name of the competitor may or may Name of the competitor is not

not be mentioned.
mentioned.

CHAPTER-2
REGULATORY BODIES
5

Advertising Regulations
Advertising regulation refers to the laws and rules defining the ways in which
products can be advertised in a particular region. Rules can define a wide number
of different aspects, such as placement, timing, and content.
Advertising regulation refers to the laws and rules defining the ways in which
products can be advertised in a particular region.
Need and Purpose of regulatory body
Advertising has been in the vortex of controversy of the many ills that it brings to
society. It is accused of encouraging materialism and manipulating our behaviour
generally contributing to the downfall of our social system. Hence, there comes a
need for regulatory bodies.
And Purpose of the regulatory bodies would be to make sure that
advertiser and advertisements are Truthful and fair to consumers and
competitors. Within the bounds of generally accepted standards of public
decency. Not used indiscriminately for the promotion of products, hazardous or
harmful to society or to individuals particularly minors, to a degree unacceptable to
society at large.
Advertising Regulatory Bodies around the World
Some of the well-known regulatory bodies are Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI)
Federal Trade Commission for United States
Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for United Kingdom
Advertising Standards Authority ASA) for South Africa

Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI)

6

Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) is a self-regulatory voluntary organization of

the advertising industry in India.
Like other countries around the world, India too has a self-regulatory organization (SRO) for
advertising content The Advertising Standards Council of India, ASCI founded in 1985. The
three main constituents of advertising industry viz advertisers, advertising agencies and media
came together to form this independent NGO. The aim of ASCI is to maintain and enhance the
public's confidence in advertising. Their mandate is that all advertising material must be truthful,
legal and honest, decent and not objectify women, safe for consumers - especially children and
last but not the least, fair to their competitors.
ASCIs team consists of the Board of Governors, the Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) and
its Secretariat. ASCI has 12 members in its Board of Governors, four each representing the key
sectors such as Advertisers, advertising agencies, media and allied professions such as market
research, consulting, business education etc. The CCC currently has about 21 members: 9 are
from within the industry and 12 are from the civil society like well-known doctors, lawyers,
journalists, academicians, consumer activists, etc. The CCCs decision on complaint against any
ad is final. ASCI also have its own independent Secretariat of 5 members which is headed by the
Secretary General.
There is no other non-governmental body in India which regulates the advertising content that is
released in India.
Objectives of ASCI
The main objects to be pursued by the Company on its incorporation are:
To monitor administer and promote standards of advertising practices in India with a view to.
i. Ensuring the truthfulness and honesty of representations and claims made through advertising
and safeguarding against misleading advertising.
ii. Ensuring that Advertising is not offensive to generally accepted norms and standards of public
decency.
iii. Safeguarding against the indiscriminate use of advertising for the promotion of products or
services, which are generally regarded as hazardous to society or to individuals or which are
unacceptable to society as a whole.
iv. Ensuring that advertisements observe fairness in competition and the canons of generally
accepted competitive behavior.
v. To codify adopt and from time to time modify the code of advertising practices in India and
implement, administer and promote and publicize such a code.

vi. To provide facilities and machinery in the form of one or more Consumer Complaints
Councils having such composition and with such powers as may be prescribed from time to time
to examine complaints against advertisements in terms of the Code of Advertising practices and
report thereon.
vii. To give wide publicity to the Code and seek adherence to it of as many as possible of those
engaged in advertising.
viii. To print and publish pamphlets, leaflets, circulars or other literature or material that may be
considered desirable for the promotion of or carrying out of the objects of the Company and
disseminate it through any medium of communication.

CHAPTER-3
CASES RELATED TO COMPETITIVE ADVERTISING
8

1. Procter & Gamble India and Hindustan Unilever Ltd.

Figure 2: Dove and Pantene

Procter & Gamble India (P & G) and Hindustan Unilever Ltd.(HUL) engaged in competitive
advertising in the year 2008with their products Dove and Pantene.
In 2008 ,Dove launched Dove Go Fresh Campaign.
The same year P&G launched an adverisement in which they showed a hoarding of an image of
Mystery Shampoo which 80% women say is better than anything else.
In oppose to the same, HUL came with an advertisement of Dove saying, There is no mystery.
Dove is the No.1 Shampoo.
Complaint
The main allegation of HUL was disparagement of its brand Dove due to the aforesaid
advertisement.
In oppose to the same, HUL came with an advertisement of Dove saying, There is no mystery.
Dove is the No.1 Shampoo.

HUL take on Case

According to HUL, the advertisement of Pantene, a brand of P & G, is misleading as it claims
that the said product is the most preferred in the Indian Market.

Judgment
The complaint was accepted and ASCI ordered the P & G to refrain from making such kind of
advertisement.

Figure 3: Print ad by Procter & Gamble India (P&G)

Figure 4: Print ad by HUL

10

P&G ad

Year of Campaign

2008

Company Name

Procter & Gamble India

(P&G)

Advertising
Agency

BBDO India

Campaign Slogan

Mystery Shampoowhich
80% women say is better
than anything else.

Impact of
Campaign

Dove saying, There is no

mystery. Dove is the No.1
Shampoo
HUL filed a case in court

11

Dove reply

Year of
Campaign

2008

Company
Name

HUL

Advertising
Agency

Ogilvy & Mather

Ad Slogan

Dove saying,
There is no
mystery. Dove is the
No.1 Shampoo

Regulatory
bodies Stake

Advertising
Standards Council
of India (ASCI) .
Accepted the claim
of HUL and asked
P&G to take down
the ad.

2. SAFFOLA VS FORTUNE

12

Figure 4: Saffola vs Fortune

Adani Wilmar in its print advertisements had claimed that its Fortune Rice Bran Oil, a 100%
rice bran oil, had a higher content of Oryzanol than Maricos products, and that Oryzanol had
proven cholesterol reducing properties. Marico complained this was disparaging.

Complaint

The plaintiff, Marico Ltd., filed two suits for permanent injunction restraining the
defendant from broadcasting, printing and publishing advertisements of its productFORTUNE that allegedly disparaged the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiffs productSAFFOLA.
The defendant they claimed that there was no wrong representation of the claim that RBO
is the healthiest oil and that a disclaimer was provided for the same.
The court first addressed the issue of whether the advertisements were disparaging and
then went on to deal with the issue of whether the claims made by the defendant were false.

Marico take on Case

According to Marico, the advertisements FORTUNE disparaged the goodwill and reputation
of SAFFOLA.

Adani Wilmar Ltd. take on Case

The defendant they claimed that there was no wrong representation of the claim that RBO is
the healthiest oil and that a disclaimer was provided for the same.

Judgment
Marico first lost the case when the Delhi High Court on April 18 dismissed applications filed
by it against Adani Wilmar, alleging disparagement of its products under the brand Saffola
through the campaigns made by Fortune in TV and print media.
13

Year of Campaign

2013

Company Name

Marico Ltd.

Advertising Agency

McCann
Erickson

Campaign Slogan

Saffola's
change of heart

Year of Campaign

2013

Company Name

Adani Wilmar Ltd.

Advertising Agency

Ogilvy & Mather

Campaign Slogan

Fortune RBO oil as

being,
(a)
the
healthiest oil in the
world;

Regulatory
Stake

Marico lost the case.

bodies

3. Kiwi vs Cherry Blossom

14

Figure 5: Kiwi vs Cherry Blossom

In the year 1998,Kiwi came up with an ad showing a bottle of "KIWI" from which the word
"KIWI" is written on white surface which does not drip as against another bottle described as
"OTHERS" which drips. The product shown to have been flowing from the bottle of "OTHERS"
is from a bottle marked "Brand X" and allegedly looks like the bottle of the liquid shoe-polish
of cherry blossom.

Complaint
In Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd. v. Kiwi TTK an advertisement of the defendants liquid shoe
polish brand Kiwi was compared with the other shoe polish brand, though, not named but the
bottle had the same design and red blob on it, which the other brand Cherry Blossom had.

KIWI take on Case

The claim of Cherry Blossom Ltd are unprecedented .Nowhere in the ad were we trying to
undermine Cherry Blossom.

Cherry Blossom takes on Case

Cherry Blossom has a design registration for the shape of the bottle and thus, the bottle can be
identified with Cherry Blossom.

Judgment
The Court provided an injunction and asked KIWI to remove the red blob from the bottle of
Brand X.

15

Year of Campaign

1996

Company Name

KIWI

Advertising Agency

Grey Worldwide

Campaign Slogan

Cirage
Chaussre

Impact of Campaign

Cherry file complaint

against kiwi

Cherry Advertising
Agency

Euro RSCG

Regulatory bodies

the removal of the

red blob from the
bottle

polish

4. Coalgate vs Pepsodent

16

Figure 6: Coalgate vs Pepsodent

In the year 2013 , Pepsodent came up with a commercial that depicts Tri-closan an ingredient in
Pepsodent stays in the mouth four hours after brushing and qualifies a preventive cavity test.
Also, while the Pepsodent Boy passed this test, the Colgate Boy was shown to have failed. In
another frame, the Colgate Boy was shown brushing his teeth in an improper manner, whose
teeth had gaps (indicating cavities) and whose mother seemed very unhappy.

Complaint
Colgate contended that no such test exists in the world. All this implied, that Colgates toothpaste
could cause cavities and was therefore disparaging of their product.

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd takes on Case

According to Colgate Palmolive ,HUL claims that Pepsodent GermiCheck had 130% attack
power is false. This false statement violated several provisions of the Advertising Councils Code
as well as The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, as it amounted to misbranding. Also, the print and TV
commercial portrayed Colgates product in bad light and falsely depicted that the use of Colgate
could cause cavities.

HUL take on Case

17

HUL argued that the words Pepsodent now better than Colgate Strong Teeth were meant to
convey that Colgate Strong Teeth was no longer a good product. Also, the word Attaaaack used
in the ad was an attack on Colgate and not on the cavity causing germs.

Judgment
The court held that the word attack in the print ad was related to Pepsodents germ fighting
capability and was not an attack on Colgate.

Year of Campaign

2013

Company Name

Colgate Palmolive (India)

Ltd

Advertising Agency

Rediffusion Y&R

Campaign Slogan

Colgate strong teeth

Year of Campaign

2013

18

Company Name

HUL

Advertising Agency

Ogilvy & Mather

Campaign Slogan

Pepsodent GermiCheck Superior

Power

Impact of Campaign

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd filed

a case in court claiming that the
claims of HUL ad werefalse and it
voilated several codes.

Advertising Agency
Regulatory bodies

the court held that the word

attack in the print ad was related
to Pepsodents germ fighting
capability and was not an attack on
Colgate.

STORYBOARD OF COLGATE VS PEPSODENT

19

In this ad two boys were told

to brush there with Colgate
and Pepsodent respectively
for cavity test.

After brushing the teeth boy

who brushed his teeth with
Colgate told doctor that you
told me that you will test my
teeth.

Colgate boy had brushed their

teeth and showed to doctor to
check

Doctor replied to go.

After 4 hours later

Doctor replied that he test
cavities in teeth when danger of
cavities will more .

20

Both boys at their school

open their lunch box to eat
lunch

while taking their lunch..

Doctor stop them and

asked them he test
cavities.

Cavities test going on

Teeth shows with germs and

comparison of paste has been
done

Germ fighter warriors

fighting with germ

Pepsodent fight 130% germ

Boy showing Pepsodent win

130% germ
21

attack

ATTAAAACK

5. Rin vs Tide

Figure 7: Rin vs Tide

The Indian market saw the very bold comparative advertising on the television screens that took
comparative advertising to new heights. Rin launched a commercial comparing Rin and Tide
naturals. In the ad the boy using rin questions AUNTY CHAUNK KYU GAYI ? with the
obvious reference to tide caption CHAUNK GAYE ! Thus claiming better whiteness than tide
naturals at an affordable price. The advertisement took the advantage of the break in the court
due to a long weekend. HUL was well-equipped with the fact that the courts decision would take
at least three days to be announced and hence it continuously showed the ad during the period so
as to do maximum damage to the competitor's product.

Complaint
Firstly, P&G filed a case in the Calcutta High Court against Hindustan Unilever's new ad
campaign, which openly challenged the superiority of its product Rin over P&G's Tide. Later on
HUL challenged P&G in the court that Tide Naturals did not contain lemon and chandan and
convinced the court that P&G should drop the word `Naturals' from the name and merely
displaying a disclaimer It does not contain lemon and chandan" was not enough.

P&G take on Case

22

 We are aware of the disparaging advertisement on air against Tide Naturals and have filed a
case against the same," The matter is currently being heard in the court and we are not in a
position to comment on the outcome, "Yes, we have filed a petition for contempt of court
against HUL based on their new Rin commercial showcasing several similar elements as aired in
their earlier disparaging advertisement which was ordered to be taken off air by the Kolkata HC
in an ad interim proceedings. We cannot comment further on this at this stage as the matter is sub
juice,"

HUL take on Case

"We respect the court order and we are in full compliance of the same. As the matter is sub
judice, we cannot comment on this. The advertisement is totally factual and represents the
price of the two brands. The advertisement helps consumers to make an informed choice".

Judgment
Meanwhile, the advertising watchdog Advertisement Standard Council of India (ASCI) has said
it has issued a notice to FMCG major HUL asking it to substantiate its claim in two weeks about
the TV commercial that its washing powder Rin is better than rival P&G's Tide. P&G admitted in
the court that Tide Natural used only the fragrance of lemon and chandan. Thus, P&G was
instructed by the court to clarify to the customers the fact that its product did not contain the
ingredients as claimed by it.
Year of Campaign

2009

Company Name

P&G

Advertising Agency

J.Walter Thompson

Campaign Slogan

CHAUNK GAYE !

Impact of Campaign

Rin launched a commercial

comparing Rin and Tide
naturals. In the ad, the boy
using rin questions
AUNTY CHAUNK KYU
GAYI ?

23

Year of Campaign

2010

Company Name

HUL

Advertising Agency

Ogilvy & Mather

Campaign Slogan

AUNTY
GAYI ?

Impact of Campaign

P&G takes HUL to court over

Rin advertisement.

CHAUNK

KYU

HUL had to remove the ad from

further broadcasting.

STORYBOARD FOR RIN VS TIDE

24

In this ad, two women waiting

for school bus of their children

Both women had a basket in

which women in blue saree
had a basket carrying Rin
and women wearing purple
saree had tide.

In this she telling the

features of tide as tide has
fragnance.

After sometimes school bus

arrived

Children get down from

school bus.

After watching boy with

white shirt women got
shocked.

25

Boy asked his mom why aunty

got shocked

This shows that Rin gives

more white and clean clothes
than tide.

And that also in very less

price of rs 25.

6. Microsoft vs. Google Chrome

Figure 8: Microsoft vs. Google Chrome

Longtime rivals Microsoft and Google are constantly looking for ways to top one another. In
March 2013, Google released an ad titled Chrome: Now Everywhere to promote their browser. 2
months later, Microsoft came up with an ad campaign titled Scroogled to warn Chrome users that
Google is breaching their privacy. Microsoft parodied Google Chromes ad by releasing an ad
titled Microsoft Internal Google Chrome Bouncing Ball Now Everywhere, claiming that Chrome
tracks everything they do.

Complaint
According to Microsoft, chrome tracks everything we do and ads or the links are shown
according to the web pages we view which are illegal.

Google take on Case

"Microsofts latest venture comes as no surprise; competition in the wearable space is really
heating up." Google also suggested that while Microsoft was busy selling t-shirts, Google was
working hard on Google Glass.

Microsoft takes on Case

According to Microsoft, Chrome tracks everything they do.
26

Judgment
FTC looked into Microsoft claims extensively and decided that Microsoft claims were baseless
and ask them to take down their ad.

Year of Campaign

2013

Company Name

Google

Advertising
Agency

72andSunny

Campaign Slogan

Chrome: Now Everywhere

Impact
Campaign

Microsoft came up with an ad campaign

titled Scroogled to warn Chrome users.

of

27

Year of Campaign

2013

Company Name

Microsoft

Advertising
Agency

IPG(inter Public group)

Campaign Slogan

Scroogled

Impact
Campaign

FTC
looked into Microsoft claims
extensively and decided that Microsoft
claims were baseless and ask them to take
down their ad.

of

Microsoft
Advertising
Agency

IPG(inter Public group)

Regulatory bodies

FTC (Federal Trade Commission)

CHAPTER- 4
COMPANY DETAILS
28

Shradha Suman creative art is a print advertising agency established in1999 by Mr. Bijay Ketan
Barick. It is located in 24 Hauz Khas, New Delhi. Doordarshan and Dentsu is its main client. The
main achievement of the ad agency being 2009-2014 congress election print media ads.

Figure 9: company visiting card

Figure 10: company reply

REFERENCES

29

 http://wps.pearsoned.co.uk/wps/media/objects/1452/1487687/glossary/gloss
ary.html#C
http://marketinginformationcentre.ca/marketing_definitions_(c-d).htm
http://wps.pearsoned.co.uk/wps/media/objects/1452/1487687/glossary/gloss
ary.html#C
http://marketinginformationcentre.ca/marketing_definitions_(c-d).htm
http://www.ibfindia.com/advertising-standards-council-india-asci
http://spicyip.com/2013/05/comparative-advertising-delhi-hc.html
http://rostrumlegal.com/comparative-advertisements-ipr-infringement-vis-avis-balanced-approach/
http://googleweblight.com/
http://www.afaqs.com/news/story/29305_Rin-vs-Tide---Hit-and-run
http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/advertising-war-campaigns-between-rivals

30