ASSIGNMENT ON COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING

The latest offensive is of Comparative advertising of Rin – a TV which claims to be better

than Tide by not just naming but showing the competitive product, has brought the debate
on comparative advertising back in focus. In my view, comparative advertising is permissible
if it’s based on facts. We has to say about comparative advertising with it’s Code of
Conduct .In the Rin ad, the claim is limited to a whiter wash- ‘Tide se kahin behatar safedi
de Rin’ (Rin gives better whiteness than Tide), without getting into specific, feature-to-
feature comparison. Almost all detergent ads promise a whiter wash – except that they used
to refer to ‘ordinary detergents’ leaving the consumer to figure that they are talking about her
brand. The only difference here is that a competitor has been named, and shown brazenly.
This claim is based on laboratory tests done through globally accepted protocols in
independent third-party laboratories’.

Comparative ads aren’t new to India. Many years ago, Trikaya Grey created an ad for HCL
Photocopiers which directly named Modi Xerox in their ads. The comparison was feature-
to-feature and specifically mentioned why HCL was better. There have been others too – the
recent Horlicks vs. Complan ads come to mind. It’s a double edged sword since it reminds
the consumer about your competing brand – just as the Surf Lalitaji ads reminded
consumers of Nirma. It may also repulse a few consumers who don’t like brand bashing
preferring for you to speak about your positives rather than the negatives of the competition

Without solid factual backup, comparative ads only serve to create a ruckus and bring the
advertising and the brand(s) into the public eye. It remains to be seen how Tide will react
but that they may not respond directly. The ads remain on air with a high frequency for a
short period of time, creating a lot of buzz before .Sometimes it may backfire on the
advertiser – like in the case of Fusion water tanks. They released an ad (around the same
time as the HCL ads) which said: ‘Bad news for Sintex’. It was based on a claim that Fusion
had 6 new features over Sintex – the generic name for water tanks. I am not sure if it
benefited Fusion; the HCL ads on the other hands helped increase shares dramatically.

.Globally, comparative ads have been around for decades. There’s this classic ad for Penn
Tennis Balls from Fallon McElligot which was endearing simply because the comparison was
tongue in cheek. Another Example is the ‘Get a Mac’ ads for Apple which take a dig at some
of PC’s features and also highlight the positives of Mac OS X., Audi took on it’s competitors –
Lexus, BMW, Mercedes et al . On the back of another fact – Audi is growing faster than
Mercedes, Lexus or BMW – they released another ad, ‘The Spell‘, which again named
competing brands directly. The Rin ad, compared to such efforts remains at a claim level.
Comparative ads exist in other parts of the world. It is common to take on the rivals once in a
while with funny ads. In India products in the ads are demonstrated by using an unbranded
product. If it is Colgate toothpaste the rival toothpaste packing will be just white in color. Same is
the case with any other product.
Comparative ads are good if done in a responsible way. The brands can instead focus on
producing great ads which provide an experience. All the ads with Hutch’s Pugh and
Vodafone’s Zoo Zoo’s are good examples of this. Airtel’s 2009 ads also leave the audience with
an experience. Advertising is all about experience. According to analysts, until the 1990s,
Horlicks was the more aggressive player in the health drink market compared to Complan. While
Horlicks introduced a series of variants aimed at the family segment and promoted its products
well, Complan lay low on the promotional front, with its ads just focusing on the "extra growth"
attribute.
Another example is of GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare India Ltd and Heinz India Pvt.
Ltd recently brought out comparative ads in print and television claiming that their energy
drinks—Horlicks and Complan, respectively—had more nutritional content even as they took
potshots at their competitor. In the news of late has been the Dunkin’ Donuts vs. Starbucks taste
test ads where Dunkin’ Donuts tells consumers that more “hard-working” people prefer their
coffee than the high-priced Starbucks, “elitist” coffee. Rumor has it, Time Warner is preparing to
launch a comparative advertising campaign against Verizon.
And now, Campbells is attacking Progresso with ads telling consumers that more Progresso soups
contain MSG than Campbells soups do. Progresso is responding with its own attack and its
own Progresson Taste Challenge. Check out the 3-frame ad I found on Yahoo! this morning
inviting consumers to take the Progresso vs. Campbells taste test.

Also Pepsi Challenge has also tried to differentiate PEPSI from Coke. Apple and PC- Apple
pushes a hip, cool image of their product and a negative uncool image of PC. Progresso and
Cambells- Progresso challenges consumer to "taste the difference". Other examples are of
Apple and Droid which looks to sabotize each another. Jet airlines also does comparative
advertising”WE HAVE CHANGED” with their dominant competitor as Kingfisher “ WE HAVE
MADE THEM CHANGE” . Big Bazaar has done the advertising of “WEST - ASIDE “. Lifebuoy
has added with –“GLOBAL HAND WASHING DAY “with Dettol advertising effecting – “MAKE
EVERYDAY A HAND WASH DAY”. Another example is Indigo Airlines – GO DEGRADED with
KINGFISHER- FLY UPGRADED.

So at last this instances in the advertising world is creating a evident Mud- Slinging
happening in the Advertising World.