A hefty dispute: SC Johnson appeals US National Advertising decision on “unsubstantiated” Ziploc bag claims

15 Nov 2021 --- SC Johnson is appealing a ruling made against advertising claims the company made that its Ziploc plastic bags have “unbeatable” protection, freshness and technology. The household cleaning supplies manufacturer also makes claims that its Ziploc outperforms major competitors on strength.

The BBB National Programs National Advertising Division (NAD) in the US decided the company must modify claims for its Ziploc storage bags to make clear the relevant conditions under which consumers would experience the claimed benefits.

These modifications were:

• Claims that Ziploc Slider bags are “stronger than Hefty on punctures and tears” and that Ziploc’s entire line of storage bags are stronger than Hefty’s comparable line of storage bags.
• “Unbeatable protection” and “outperform competitors in strength and reliability,” and related implied claims.
• “Unbeatable freshness” and “preserves and extends the life of food” (to the extent the context implies a comparative message), and a related implied claim.
• “Unbeatable technology.”

The claims at issue, which appeared in two commercials on Amazon.com, Ziploc’s product packaging, free-standing inserts and Ziploc’s website, were challenged by Reynolds Consumer Products, the manufacturer of Hefty storage bags.

An SC Johnson spokesperson tells PackagingInsights it will fight the decision as the company argues sufficient testing methods back the claims.

“SC Johnson will appeal the NAD’s decision on the strength of Ziploc slider bags against punctures and tears, which is sufficiently supported by industry-standard testing, as well as the NAD’s decision on Ziploc’s ‘unbeatable freshness’ and ‘unbeatable protection’ claims.”

Failures to connect claims
NAD says it determined the “stronger than Hefty on punctures and tears” claim construed a message that Ziploc’s entire line of storage bags are stronger than Hefty’s comparable line of storage bags.

SC Johnson intends to fight the decision.Further, NAD concluded the advertiser’s American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) tests were reliable puncture and tear resistance tests for plastic bags when exposed to a falling object. However, NAD found that such tests do not support a general, unqualified superiority claim on punctures and tears because the advertiser “failed to connect the results to examples of real-world use.”

Therefore, NAD recommended the advertiser modify its claims to make clear the relevant conditions under which consumers would experience the claimed benefits.

NAD concluded the “unbeatable protection” and “outperform competitors in strength and reliability” claims, as used in the context of the challenged advertising, could be understood by consumers to mean that Ziploc storage bags offer equivalent or even superior protection to all comparable competitor storage bags across a broad range of meaningful metrics – claims that are not supported.

NAD noted nothing in its decision prevents the advertiser from making supported claims about its bags and the conditions under which its bags provide benefits to consumers.

Freshness fight
Regarding the claims “unbeatable freshness” and “preserves and extends the life of food, NAD determined that although the advertiser did not specify competitor products in its advertising, “consumers are likely to believe that Ziploc bags are unsurpassed by all comparable competitor products in preserving freshness.”

NAD also concluded the advertiser’s moisture loss test was not a good fit for the unqualified comparative freshness claims and recommended the advertiser modify such claims to make clear the relevant conditions under which consumers would experience the claimed benefits.

As it appears in the challenged free-standing insert, NAD determined consumers will reasonably understand the “unbeatable technology” claim to mean that Ziploc storage bags have the best technology in preserving freshness and providing protection.

During the proceeding, the advertiser voluntarily discontinued the following claims:

• “Strongest film against punctures and tears.”
• “Easier to open and close than any other bag.”
• “New.”
• The implied claim that when Hefty storage bags are used in the real world, they will easily tear apart and are therefore of lesser quality.
• The implied claim that Ziploc’s storage bags are more accessible to open than all other competitor’s comparable storage bags.

By Louis Gore-Langton

To contact our editorial team please email us at editorial@cnsmedia.com