In an ad claims dispute involving Procter & Gamble Co.'s Olean fat substitute, the Council of Better Business Bureaus National Advertising Division, New York, said P&G ads inaccurately implied Olean was a "natural" substance. That claim and others were challenged by Olean critic Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington. NAD found other Olean ad claims challenged by CSPI were substantiated. It backed P&G claims that products made with Olean are "a little better to eat" and "a better choice" because the ad copy referred to full-fat snacks. NAD rejected CSPI arguments that the P&G ads should disclose the possibility of side effects, saying P&G had no legal obligation to disclose in ads side effects listed on product labels. The P&G TV and print campaign for Olean, from Grey Advertising, New York, featured farmers walking through fields of soybeans while noting Olean originates from soy. P&G responded: "It was never our intent...to imply that Olean itself is found in nature. Nonetheless, even though the present advertising has run its course, we will take NAD's concerns into account for any future Olean advertising."
Copyright October 1998, Crain Communications Inc.