Law of the Land

Know the terms and spirit of the Law and then study the page. Wonder where the enforcers are ?

MRTPC, now renamed as Competition Commission, quoted the below mentioned Ruling of the Supreme Court of India, while passing the verdict in the first case between Colgate and Hindustan Unilever

The Supreme Court had ruled that  "the object is to bring honesty and truth in the relationship between the manufacturer and the consumer". And "if the general impression conveyed is false, the most punctilious and scrupulous accuracy in immaterial minutiae will not render the representations true"  [a lie is a lie even if covered with irrelevant packing and convoluted explanations]

2. MRTPC: "if the claim of "102"% anti- bacterial superiority is ultimately not found to be true," consumers by and large can be said to have been duped by such advertisement campaign - if the advertised claim is ultimately not found to be true can be substituted for the earlier words within quotes. That is, the observation is not meant for one case but for all tall, dubious and unproven claims

3 Affected Party / Public: 'This injury caused to the public in general can hardly be compensated in terms of money, as the feeling of being duped cannot be evaluated in monetary terms'. This observation is against Hindustan Lever.

Has the Public ever been compensated, in deeds, money or punishing the guilty in the last 50 years ?

Hindustan Unilever, Colgate, Johnson & Johnson and many others have violated the terms and spirit of the Law of the Land. Please check Site Map 2 and select your page

CNBC TV 18 runs a program with Lever - Lessons in Marketing Excellence

Should it not be titled as unethical means to cheat the Public

 

If I were the President, I will put the Chairman and the Board in jail, besides group heads and also make them pay 10 Crores penalty per day for every suspect product, till they provide the proof for a claim  / or prove the benefit that they claim for a product.  Secondly, they should release double the number of advertisements, admitting their misdeeds and clarifying the position / exact facts to the public.

Why single out Hindustan Lever ?

Lever Brothers is an over 150 years old, world wide company. Hindustan Unilever is the Indian Wing, with over 10000 Crores Sales. Personal Care Products perhaps account for the bulk. Their daily spend on Advertising is 10 Crores.

1. If a court punishes a major culprit in the field, other smaller ones will take note and automatically behave

2. I do expose the questionable claims and practices of Marico, Johnson & Johnson, Himalaya and others in other pages in this site.

3. At 69, I spend over 5 hours a day watching TV. Lever’s frequent advertisements naturally catch my attention

4. You have to take into account the other pages mentioned above, to get a consolidated picture.

However, on this page,  my views are confined to Lever to serve as a sample case to the reader

 

Lever's lofty standard before Court

Monday, 15th March, 2010: Business Standard    Reporting on the basis of briefing / news gathered

Lever filed a complaint against Ariel / Proctor & Gamble, accusing it of making 'unsubstantiated Claim'. Making an 'unsubstantiated Claim' is legally wrong is accepted by Hindustan Unilever.

How many of Lever's products are backed by 'substantiated claims' and how many are blared with 'unsubstantiated claims?'

Lever's charge:  " P&G, by naming its product as 'Naturals' is inducing false belief in the consumers that the detergent powder is softer on the skin and ...."  I agree with HUL's argument.

The above stand of HUL before the Madras High Court confirms their dubious double standards. So, if they are caught on the same ground for other products, it exposes them to be a cheap and deliberate dupers of Public

Hindustan Unilever, Lakme Lever, Ponds, Brooke Bond

 

Shampoos: Clinic Plus, All Clear, Dove, Sunsilk, New Organics, Ayush

Fairness cream: Fair & Lovely

Toilet Soaps / bars: Lifebuoy, Lux, Hamam, Dove, Pears, Liril, and perhaps Le Sancy, Sunlight

Detergents: Surf, Rin [ Rinso and Dalda of 1960, are now dead]

Dishwasher: VIM

Toothpaste: Pepsodent, Close up and Signal

Water purfier / Pure it: One Crore Rupee challange - one does not note the ads nowadays. What was the US test report ?

Tea / coffee: Brooke bond / Bru

Ice creams: Kwality, I think

The company makes very many products and some are daily use products by the 120 Crores Indian Public.

When such a big company bluffs / dupes the public, the act is done very deliberately and with the confidence that it can manage. It is just not bothered about welfare of the consumers / the society - it is an insult to the Society in a way

 

The points / products are put in alphabetical order. Summarised facts, analysis and the duping practices of Lever are mentioned in this section. For more details, one should refer to the data under each topic.

The charge sheet now follows. Make your own assessment. If there be any error or oversight, let me know and I can correct that

 

TV Advertisement claims 25-12-2007 and 1-1-2008

‘ Dandruff will not come back after a week, a month or a year‘  - market results / Lever's action does not support this claim

Does it not mean that the other anti dandruff shampoos of Levers, are not as good as All Clear ? Why sell less effective products ?

Market figures either in India or elsewhere does not support the next logical view - All Clear has become a world famous shampoo and sizeable section of the Indian Society got rid of Dandruff

Advertisement Source and message

Star Plus Channel, about 2210 hours:, 30th January, 2002 and Star Plus Channel, Khulja Sim Sim programme, February 1, 2002

"92% of hair is protein. Soap weakens / lowers the protein. Result ? Hair becomes brittle and breaks. The Hair Suffers. New Clinic Plus restores the Protein to the hair."   Lever cannot defend this claim. It is absurd and unscientific

[ How I wish that the body hair is made out of Silver and not Keratin ? Silver price has nearly doubled in 18 months ]

Body hair is also made out of Protein / Keratin. Lever is more than 150 years old. Do their records show that their soaps harmed the hair, before introduction of Shampoo ? Should they not check their records before opening the mouth too wide

If yes, those who lost should seek proper legal counsel / compensation in their respective countries, now that they 'have the confessional statement' from Levers. We all use Soaps to clean ourselves and not loose the body hair.

If what they say is true, it is a self confession that they are cheats.

The proof is simple. All Indian Males take bath with Toilet Soaps / Toilet bars . They all should have lost the body hair with routine, daily use. They have not. So, what Lever says is a lie.

If you have been purposely misled by the other person for his benefit, it is a blatant breach of trust in a way.

In case they honestly mean what they said, they should stop selling their Toilet Soap / bars in India. How many males would like to loose the body hair ?

Hope an enterprising Attorney in US would find ways to file a civil suit

Fair & Lovely

Nothing Fair or Lovely except the name

is my short, summary view on this product. Lever should get ‘Duping India’ award. The fairness benefit is unsubstantiated and unproven in their own survey, conducted after 30 plus long years

1. Fairness is the advertised benefit of the product. In the sham survey that Lever conducted, Fairness was the unasked and untested feature. You sell a product for fairness. And it is not checked at all. The level of cheapness is nauseating

2. It is not a use alone product as advertised on TV

3. In the features tested, there is no significant difference amongst the four similar products of different companies. Yet the histograms is skewed and slanted in favour of Fair & Lovely. It is a deliberate misrepresentation

4. Whether the survey was done with 200 or 800 is not clear.

5. Survey was conducted in March 2008 and not started earlier and concluded in March 2008. How or why they did it within 31 days is a wonder.

6. Medical views are against Fairness Creams

It is a beautiful, appealing, decorative mannequin with no functional utility. In the end, it is just plaster of Paris.  

 

Hindustan Lever's advertisement: Headlines Today -  around 2230 hours on 25th August, 2011

 

'New Clear Shampoo is the best Shampoo in India'. If Lever has any integrity, they should stop 'Sunsilk'

unbeatable Shampoo is the new slogan for the New Clear Shampoo in the TV advertisement on or around 24th October, 2011. Whatever expertise they shouted about in the 40 years in Clinic Plus and such others was less than true is the only interpretation that I can make

I think that their first / one early advertisement was objected and withdrawn - perhaps Advertising Council of India finally acted

 

Sunsilk conditioner's advertisement / Lever's Message:

Star one TV channel on 7th April and Sony TV on 6-4-2009

Shampoo cannot reduce hair fall and will make the hair rough

Ms Marino / Paras Pharmaceuticals - TV advertisements during December 2005 ODI Cricket Matches

Message:  It is immaterial what shampoo you use. It will make the hair dry and harsh. After Shampoo, use Ms Marino to keep your hair soft and healthy

If Paras knew it in 2005 and I knew it in 1995 [ criticised the use of shampoo in Tips for the Top booklet published in Oct 1995] Lever should have known it much earlier to 2005

Suppression of fact is a deliberate act of misdeed. The Society suffers. There must be laws to punish the offender

US Civil court levied a penalty of above 140 Billion Dollars on US Tobacco Companies for suppressing from the Public for years, the ill effects of Tobacco Smoking even after realising it

 

Sunsilk conditioner's advertisement came on Star one TV channel on 7th April and Sony TV channel, on 6-4-2009

Shampoo cannot reduce hair fall and will make the hair rough

They have suppressed this fact from the Public for years. Worse is the fact that they continue to do that. This is a deliberate and malicious act of misdeed in my view

If Cigarette makers put a warning signal on the label, Shampoo makers also should. We neither act fast nor take a broad view. Convenient patch work steps are often taken to appease some and ignore the 'mute millions'

Bathing Bars contain less TFM [ below 75%] and more of the skin harming materials. Naturally they should be deemed inferior in Quality. Dove is a bathing bar.

The Indian Toilet Soap Manufacturers Association / members not only set a new lowered standard but have perpetuated it after 1993 or so. Hindustan Lever holds over 40% share in toilet soaps / bar market.

Did the members form a cartel at the cost of Public in 1993 ? It seems like that. Godrej got out afterwards. ‘The company has taken a conscious decision to manufacture & market only high TFM (total fatty matter) Godrej's website News -16-9-1999:

CNBC -TV18 runs a program called Marketing Excellence with Hindustan Unilever ! I only notice Marketing Cheapness

 

[ I do not agree that Truth and Integrity have no place in Business or Government Offices.  Only about 95% of the fellows indulge in Corruption unlike in 1960, when it was perhaps 10%. These are my guesstimates. Anyway, we have lease for 20% of Greenland. If that 95% is settled in Greenland, problem gets resolved. Godrej No 1 Soap is getting increasing share of the market, with hardly much advertisement. It turned back on 1999 and started making high TFM soaps. ]