By Lesley Fair

Star power is an undeniable draw.  A celebrity endorsement can be persuasive to shoppers both because the star may be perceived as a trusted source of information and because – to some extent – we all “wanna be like Mike.”  The revised Endorsement Guides issued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) offer practical tips to advertisers and the talent they hire on the lawful use of celebrity endorsements.

• To thine own self be true.  The bedrock principle for celebrity endorsements – and any testimonial – is that they must reflect the honest opinion or experience of the endorser.  If the ad suggests that the celebrity is a satisfied customer, he or she actually must use the product.  In addition, the endorsement shouldn’t convey an objective claim the advertiser can’t substantiate.  If you don’t have scientific proof to establish that your product will cure arthritis or increase gas mileage, don’t use a celebrity to make those claims for you.
• Time will tell.  You may use a celebrity’s endorsement only as long as you have good reason to believe the opinions in the ad continue to be the views of the celebrity.  One way to satisfy your obligation is to check periodically that the celebrity’s opinions remain the same.  This ongoing duty to substantiate takes on particular importance if there’s been a change to your product, if new information comes to light about its performance, or if the celebrity’s use of your product has changed.
• Don’t bury your head in the sand.  A marketing campaign isn’t the time for ostrich-like behavior.  Even if a celebrity is given a script to read, he can’t ignore signs that claims made about the product are false or misleading.  For example, suppose an advertiser says its roasting bag can cook chicken in 30 minutes.  During the shoot, the celebrity hired to appear in the ad watches five unsuccessful attempts to get the product to work.  Each time the chicken was raw after 30 minutes and needed a full hour to cook.  However, in the commercial, the celebrity is shown placing a chicken in the bag, taking out a perfectly roasted chicken, and saying that if you want great chicken every time in only 30 minutes, this is the product you need.  The celebrity could be liable for the deceptive statement about the product and the advertiser could be liable for misrepresentations made through the endorsement.
• Directions about connections.  The revised Guides offer advice on when financial ties between advertisers and celebrities must be disclosed.  If the audience would reasonably expect that a financial connection exists, disclosure is unnecessary.  For example, say a tennis star appears in ads for a line of polo shirts.  It’s unlikely that the terms of her lucrative contract would have to be disclosed because most people would expect she was paid for that kind of deal.  However, now suppose she’s a guest on a morning talk show.  When asked about her recent victories, she credits them to a laser vision correction procedure at a clinic she names.  She doesn’t disclose her contractual deal with the clinic that requires her to speak publicly about her surgery.  Viewers might not realize that a celebrity discussing a medical procedure in a TV interview had been paid to tout the clinic.  Because knowing that fact would likely affect the weight a viewer would give her opinion, the endorsement is likely deceptive without a clear and conspicuous disclosure.

For more on the revised Guides, read The FTC’s Revised Endorsement Guides:  What People are Asking and watch the FTC’s videos.

Lesley Fair is an attorney with the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.