In this case, the implied claim was that Brave doesn’t share personal data with third parties.Īs part of its inquiry, the NAD examined whether Brave’s privacy protection claims can be substantiated.
In June, the NAD published its decision from an inquiry into privacy-focused web browser Brave over some of Brave’s privacy-related claims.Īt issue were two so-called “express claims,” as in literal statements that Brave made about itself in its advertising (that it “stops online surveillance” and “shields everything … that can destruct your privacy”), as well as one “implied claim.” An implied claim is made indirectly or by inference. And there were some pretty interesting ones over the past year. The NAD handles around 150 cases annually. It handles disputes brought by aggrieved advertisers (like when AT&T objected to a Spectrum Mobile ad that depicted an AT&T store manager actively training an employee to lie to consumers) and it can initiate actions of its own (for instance, when a couple of Kardashians – don’t ask me which ones – failed to disclose in social media posts that they were paid to promote a detox tea product).Īlthough the NAD’s rulings aren’t binding and it can only make recommendations for a company to correct problematic advertising, the division has the bandwidth to pick up way more cases than the FTC. NAD is a self-regulatory organization that monitors the ad industry for potential false advertising, misleading claims and ineffective disclosures.
0 kommentar(er)
