The controversy surrounding Maggi noodles has raised several vital questions relating to the hygiene of the food we eat but we also need to look at the ethics of advertisement and the role of brand ambassadors. The entire gamut of issues calls for a dispassionate examination, not only from legalistic angle but from socio-ethical angle as well.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), established under the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), 2006, is mandated to ensure that the food people consume is safe and wholesome and for that it has to lay down science-based standards for articles of food and regulate manufacturing, processing, distribution, sale and import of food. In the prevailing scenario, with the adulteration being the order of the day, it is difficult to vouch for the purity of any food article.
There is no gainsaying the fact that lies are being sold; most of the advertisements are misleading and filmstars and sportspersons bequeath credibility by endorsing the products. Maggi noodles allegedly contain a high amount of monosodium glutamate (MSG) and lead, but when Madhuri Dixit claims that it is nutritious people tend to believe her.
The Union government has made it clear that under the FSSA action would be taken against the brand ambassadors. It was long overdue and would hopefully chasten rapacious icons, who can endorse anything for money. Their defence is that they endorse a product only after the concerned government agency certifies about its quality. This is a bland justification as endorsement is a step ahead of promotion in which the endorser lends credibility. Under Sec. 53 of FSSA, brand ambassador is liable for action if the advertisement is found to be misleading and can be fined up to Rs 10 lakh. Though this amount is a pittance compared to what s/he gets, imposing the fine will act as a deterrent.
It has been proved time and again that the celebrities endorsing any product hardly know anything about it but do it for hefty fees. In 2011, CBS News reported that in the United States, there were 10 celebrities on big pharma’s payroll. These include actress Claire Danes, hired by Allergan (AGN), who touts the eyelash lengthening drug Latisse, Sideways star Virginia Madsen who promoted Botox and Michael Welch, better known as Michael Newton of the Twilight series, who promoted Allergan’s anti-acne medication among others. The first major disadvantage of such endorsements is that prices go many notches up as endorsers are paid huge amounts. Brand ambassadors are hired only for branded medicines, not for the generic ones. Obviously, the pharmaceutical companies will earn profit at the cost of consumers.
Advertising Standard Council of India is a self-regulating body that has representatives from advertisers, advertising agencies and the media. It is a voluntary organisation that has to ensure that advertisements are not misleading. Besides, there are some laws to regulate the content of advertisements like Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, Press Council of India Act, 1978 and Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2006. States are empowered under the FSSA to take action, and there is provision of imprisonment and fine up to Rs 1 lakh. But these laws have not been invoked properly. False claims are made to whiten skin despite Drugs and Cosmetics Act. There are some shortcomings in the law also. The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, provides for a fine of only Rs 500 in case of false claims. So, charlatans give a damn to it and make claims to cure virtually incurable diseases in days. Even if they are punished, it does not matter as they earn in millions.
Advertisement is not a new genre. It promotes the sale by making hyperbolic claims about the product. Street criers or peddlers, who went about selling their wares, advertised their products through word-of-mouth. Besides, political and religious leaders also advertised their views through different platforms — pulpit, street meetings, village gatherings, etc. Criers at the sale of slaves in ancient Greece, Babylon, Egypt, Rome and Carthage also made big claims.
David Ogilvy, in his Confessions of an Advertising Man, (1971) wrote, “It is flagrantly dishonest for an advertising agent to urge consumers to buy a product which he would not allow his wife to buy.” This is what advertisers are doing and brand ambassadors happily acquiesce in. Brand ambassadors’ seriousness is evident from one incident. Aamir Khan was appointed brand ambassador by the Election Commission for the Maharashtra election. He urged people to vote, but was in London on the day of polling.
The Unesco-appointed MacBride Commission submitted its report in the early 1980s, but its observations are still relevant: “Advertising undoubtedly has positive features. It is used to promote desirable social aims, like savings and investment, family planning, purchase of fertiliser to improve agricultural output, etc… Nevertheless, what distinguishes advertising from the editorial content of newspapers and from radio and television programmes is that its avowed purpose is that of persuasion; a balanced debate in advertising is a contradiction in terms. Because advertising is overwhelmingly directed towards the selling of goods and services…”
Advertisements need to be regulated and strong legal action must be taken against misleading advertisements. Celebrities also must be taken to task if they endorse the product. Icons are supposed to lead and inspire, not to mislead. They should learn from Michelle Obama who started a campaign “Let’s Move” to fight obesity and oppose the advertisements of junk food. She said in a statement, “Our classrooms should be healthy places where kids are not bombarded with ads for junk food.” Similarly, Hillary Clinton successfully ran a campaign against trans fat in New York.
The writer is a senior TV journalist and author
