Key Takeaways
- The ASA upheld one complaint regarding the clarity of the “No.1 dermatologist recommended brand” claim in La Roche-Posay’s ad.
- Evidence supported La Roche-Posay’s assertion of a “new mode of action” for its Mela B3 Cleanser.
- Beauty advertisers must ensure comparative claims are both substantiated and easily verifiable under UK advertising codes.
UK Advertising Standards Authority Rules on La Roche-Posay Ad
The UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has reviewed a La Roche-Posay advertisement for its Mela B3 Cleanser following a challenge from Beiersdorf UK Ltd. The investigation focused on three specific issues in the ad, which aired in December 2024.
Beiersdorf UK Ltd raised concerns about two primary claims: first, that the product features “a new mode of action like never before,” and second, that La Roche-Posay is the “No.1 dermatologist recommended brand in the UK.” The ASA found sufficient evidence to support the first claim, noting that the active ingredient Melasyl works differently compared to existing hyperpigmentation treatments. Therefore, this assertion was deemed substantiated.
Regarding the claim of being the “No.1 dermatologist recommended brand,” the ASA accepted Beiersdorf’s evidence in the form of surveys conducted among UK dermatologists, which indicated strong recommendations for La Roche-Posay products. However, the ASA upheld a complaint related to the verifiability of this claim. The ruling indicated that the advertisement did not provide clear directions for consumers to verify the basis of the “No.1” claim, which is a requirement under UK advertising regulations.
As a result of its findings, the ASA ruled that the advertisement could not be run in its current format going forward. Future advertising from La Roche-Posay will need to clearly signpost where consumers can check the basis of comparative claims to ensure compliance with advertising standards.
This decision reinforces the need for beauty advertisers to substantiate their comparative assertions while also ensuring they are transparent and easy for consumers to verify. The ASA’s ruling marks a critical point for brands in the industry, emphasizing that both evidence and clarity are essential in marketing communications to avoid misleading consumers.
In summary, the ASA’s findings illustrate the importance of not only having solid evidence for marketing claims but also providing adequate information for consumers to validate these claims, promoting transparency and trust in advertising practices.
The content above is a summary. For more details, see the source article.
