Month: February 2023

New York, NY – February 6, 2023 – A panel of the National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate advertising law body of BBB National Programs, determined that WhatsApp, LLC provided a reasonable basis for two express claims for its WhatsApp messaging service analogizing SMS text messages to “open mail” as used in the advertiser’s television commercial titled “Doubt Delivered”:

 

• “Text messages are just like open pieces of mail, they’re all open.”
• “Every text message that individuals send is just as open as opened letters.”

 

The advertising at issue had been challenged before the National Advertising Division (NAD) by CTIA, a trade association. Following NAD’s decision (Case No. 7107), WhatsApp appealed, and CTIA cross-appealed, certain NAD findings and recommendations.

In agreement with NAD, the NARB panel determined that the principal message conveyed by the Doubt Delivered commercial is that SMS text messages, not protected by end-to-end encryption, are more vulnerable to being intercepted/read by unauthorized parties than are messages sent through technologies employing end-to-end encryption. Thus, the panel concluded that the two “open mail” claims are properly supported by the advertiser’s evidence as used in the present context.

In the underlying decision, NAD concluded that three unsupported implied claims were found communicated by the Doubt Delivered commercial and recommended that they be discontinued. However, the NARB panel reached a different conclusion and determined that there were no implied messages regarding wireless carriers in the Doubt Delivered commercial.

WhatsApp thanked the panel for “its careful consideration and the self-regulatory process that led to this decision.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Review Board (NARB): The National Advertising Review Board (NARB) is the appellate body for BBB National Programs’ advertising self-regulatory programs. NARB’s panel members include 85 distinguished volunteer professionals from the national advertising industry, agencies, and public members, such as academics and former members of the public sector. NARB serves as a layer of independent industry peer review that helps engender trust and compliance in NAD, CARU, and DSSRC matters.

Global budgets focused on the total cost of care found to reduce costs and improve quality

The state of Maryland saved Medicare more than $780 million, reduced preventable hospital admissions, and decreased emergency department visits in the first three years of a new payment model that offers incentives and supports to a range of providers to transform care in the state, according to Mathematica’s latest evaluation report and findings at a glance. Maryland and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services partnered to test the Maryland Total Cost of Care Model combines the use of global budgets, which fix the amount of revenue a hospital will receive in an upcoming year, with incentives to reduce the cost of care provided to Medicare beneficiaries from all providers, not just care from hospitals. Maryland and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services partnered to test the model.

“Global budgets and the newly added accountability for all care costs are big changes to the way hospitals are paid,” said Gregory Peterson, project director and principal researcher at Mathematica. “Our evaluation of the Total Cost of Care Model finds that this new payment model is having a strong influence on hospital outcomes in Maryland and holds promise for other states looking to control rising health care costs and improve quality.”

Through the Maryland All-Payer Model, which started in 2014, Maryland became the first state to implement all-payer global budgets for most of its hospitals. In 2019, the Total Cost of Care Model broadened incentives and supports to engage a wide range of providers beyond hospitals to improve costs and quality of care, becoming one of the first states to hold hospitals accountable for the total cost of care for Medicare beneficiaries. Over the life of the Total Cost of Care Model, the state has committed to generating $2 billion in Medicare savings (by 2026).

Mathematica’s evaluation of the Maryland Total Cost of Care Model shows that it had the following favorable effects in its first three years (2019 to 2021).

• It reduced total Medicare fee-for-service spending by 2.5 percent, leading to a $781 million reduction in total spending.
• It substantially reduced rates of all-cause acute care hospital admissions (by 16.1 percent) and moderately reduced emergency department visits (by 3.8 percent).
• It improved several quality-of-care measures, including reducing potentially preventable admissions (by 16.1 percent), reducing the likelihood of an unplanned readmission to the hospital (9.5 percent), and increasing timely follow-up after hospital discharge (2.5 percent).
• The model did not affect patients’ ratings of their personal doctor or the hospitals in which they received care, suggesting that hospitals’ efforts to improve efficiency have not come at the expense of lower patient ratings.

 

Although the model decreased total Medicare spending (largely from decreases in hospital spending), there was a substantial increase in non-hospital spending in 2021 that lessened the overall Medicare savings that year. Future analysis will determine whether this increase was an aberration or a new trend.

The Maryland Total Cost of Care Model’s approach to holding hospitals accountable for Medicare costs from all providers is meant to encourage them to engage in broader care improvement strategies and help transform care beyond their walls. Maryland’s approach can provide other states valuable lessons on this strategy for controlling rising health care costs while improving quality. Currently, Pennsylvania and Vermont are experimenting with variations of global budgets. Mathematica will next evaluate impacts in the fourth year of the model as well as take an in-depth look at what hospitals and providers are doing to achieve cost savings and improved outcomes. Learn more about the evaluation of this model and keep up to date on future research here.

 

About Mathematica: Mathematica is a research and data analytics consultancy driven by a mission to improve well-being for people and communities. We innovate at the intersection of data science, social science, and technology to translate big questions into deep insights. Collaborating closely with decision makers and changemakers, we’re reimagining the way the world collects, analyzes, and applies data to solve urgent challenges.

National Advertising Division Finds ACCO Brands’ Coronavirus and COVID-19 Elimination Claims Substantiated with Modified Testing Disclosure

 

New York, NY – February 2, 2023 – Following an inquiry by the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs, ACCO Brands USA, LLC modified the disclosure used in connection with a health-related efficacy claim on the ACCO Brands website that its TruSens Air Purifier is “effective at eliminating 99.9% of the airborne coronavirus or COVID-19” to clarify the material limitations of the claim, which NAD found was supported as qualified.

Through its routine monitoring program, NAD challenged the claim that:

 

“TruSens eliminates 99.99% of airborne coronavirus*” (*Results from independent third-party testing using aerosolized airborne concentration of human coronavirus 229E over a two-hour period in a sealed chamber. HCoV-299e is a well-established surrogate for SARS-CoV-2) next to a picture of SARS-CoV-2 virus being filtered through the TruSens device.

 

NAD’s inquiry focused on whether consumers who viewed the advertiser’s website would reasonably take away the message that the TruSens Air Purifier is effective in killing 99.99% of SARS-CoV-2 virus without seeing the disclosure that testing of the product was on a coronavirus surrogate.

Health and safety concerns are a top priority for NAD’s monitoring efforts, with particular attention focused on express or implied claims that advertised products can protect consumers against COVID-19. Claims as to the efficacy of air purifiers against SARS-CoV-2 during an ongoing pandemic are especially impactful because consumers cannot verify the truthfulness of such claims for themselves.

During the proceeding, the advertiser modified the disclosure to state: “Results from independent third-party testing using HCoV-229E, a human coronavirus with similar shape and size to COVID-19, which was aerosolized over a two-hour period in a sealed chamber. HCoV-229E is a well-established surrogate for COVID-19.”

NAD determined that ACCO Brands’ testing provided a reasonable basis for the challenged claim, “TruSens eliminates 99.99% of airborne coronavirus” together with a clear and conspicuous disclosure of the material limitations of the claim (testing on a surrogate and length of time to achieve the result) in similar size, text, and font in close proximity to the claim.  NAD also found that ACCO Brands products effectively filter SARS-Cov-2, providing additional support for the advertiser’s claim that “TruSens Air Purifier is effective at eliminating 99.99% of airborne coronavirus or COVID-19.”

In its advertiser statement, ACCO Brands thanked NAD for “its careful and professional review of the substantiation for TruSens’ claim to eliminate 99.99% of airborne coronavirus” and stated that it “will clarify the disclosures accompanying the claim in keeping with the recommendations expressed in NAD’s decision.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

New York, NY – February 1, 2023 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs recommended that Charter Communications, Inc. discontinue or modify the claim that Spectrum is America’s leading internet service provider (ISP). NAD also recommended that Charter discontinue the claim “Advanced WiFi. A better kind of internet” or modify it to avoid conveying a message of superiority over Spectrum’s competitors.

The claims at issue, which appeared across several forms of media, were challenged by AT&T Services, Inc.

 

America’s “Leading” ISP Claims

Advertisers must be careful to avoid conveying unintended comparative superiority messages against the products or services of their competitors if such message is not supported.

With respect to the messages reasonably conveyed by the “America’s leading internet provider” claim in the challenged advertisements, NAD determined that while consumers may understand the claim as relating to market share, in the context of the challenged advertisements consumers may also reasonably interpret the message to be that Spectrum Internet:

• Has the most subscribers of any ISP in America;
• Provides the fastest speeds of any ISP in America; and
• Is superior to all other ISPs with respect to reliability and security.

 

Because these messages were not supported by Charter’s evidence, NAD recommended that Charter discontinue claims that Spectrum Internet is America’s leading internet service provider or modify the claim or its use of the claim to avoid conveying such messages.

NAD noted that nothing in its decision prevents Charter from promoting that Spectrum Internet has the most subscribers among ISPs against which it competes or making claims of comparative performance superiority for which it has support.

 

“Better Kind of Internet” Claims

NAD determined that the claim that Spectrum offers “Advanced WiFi. A better kind of internet,” conveys the message that WiFi services with enhanced security and the ability to handle up to 200 devices are “better” than services without those features. Further, NAD found that in the context of the challenged advertisement, this claim also reasonably conveys a message of superiority over Spectrum’s competitors – an unsupported message.

Therefore, NAD recommended that Charter discontinue the claim “Advanced WiFi. A better kind of internet” or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that Spectrum Internet provides an internet experience that is superior to the internet experience provided by other ISPs because Spectrum’s WiFi is advanced relative to other ISP’s WiFi.

In its advertiser statement, Charter stated that while it “disagrees” with certain aspects of NAD’s decision, “it is a strong supporter of self-regulation and will comply with NAD’s recommendations.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.