Category: Nexis Newswire

McLean, VA – October 21, 2026 – As part of its routine, ongoing monitoring program, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division recommended that Virgin Cruises Intermediate Limited Inc. modify its Virgin Voyages advertising to clearly and conspicuously disclose service gratuities throughout the checkout process.

Virgin Voyages is an adults-only cruise line. At issue for the National Advertising Division (NAD) was whether Virgin Cruises highlighted a lead price without prominently disclosing the additional, mandatory per-night service gratuity, and whether the overall net impression of Virgin Cruises’ advertising may mislead consumers about the true all-in vacation cost.

NAD examined Virgin’s checkout process and determined that consumers are not sufficiently apprised about the discretionary nature of gratuities, how they are applied, and how they can remove them if they pay onboard. Additionally, the gratuities are referenced as a “service charge” in the final step of checkout which creates further confusion about whether they are optional.

Therefore, NAD recommended that Virgin Cruises modify its booking flow to clearly and conspicuously disclose throughout the checkout process that: (1) gratuities, while not mandatory, are not refundable if pre-paid; (2) the gratuities are higher if paid onboard; and, (3) if not prepaid, the consumer can modify or remove the gratuities prior to disembarkation including whether the removal of the gratuities are subject to the discretion of Virgin Cruises.

In its advertiser statement, Virgin Cruises Intermediate Limited stated it “appreciates the engagement” with the National Advertising Division on this matter and that it “agrees to 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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes. 

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.

McLean, VA – October 21, 2026 – As part of its routine, ongoing monitoring program, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Royal Caribbean Group’s voluntarily modified advertising is supported but recommended further changes to the company’s disclosures regarding optional pre-payment of gratuities to avoid potential consumer confusion.

Royal Caribbean is a cruise line operating since 1969 with over 30 ships to over 200 destinations for trips of varying durations. At issue for the National Advertising Division (NAD) was whether Royal Caribbean’s advertising disclosed all mandatory fees and whether the overall net impression of Royal Caribbean’s advertising was misleading about the true all-in vacation cost.

During the inquiry, Royal Caribbean modified its online booking flow to clearly and conspicuously disclose that gratuities are optional, that customers may choose whether to prepay them, and that they may modify or remove gratuities at any time prior to disembarkation.

Therefore, NAD determined that Royal Caribbean’s booking flow adequately apprised consumers of the true all-in vacation cost by highlighting the lead price and prominently disclosing that gratuities are not mandatory but, rather, are optional. However, to avoid potential consumer confusion, NAD recommended that Royal Caribbean modify the gratuities information in the “learn more” tab to clearly and conspicuously disclose that gratuities are optional, and to clearly and conspicuously disclose that gratuities are optional on the final checkout page.

In its advertiser statement, Royal Caribbean “thanks NAD for its careful review” and “has implemented 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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.

McLean, VA – October 21, 2026 – As part of its routine, ongoing monitoring program, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Royal Caribbean Group’s voluntarily modified advertising is supported but recommended further changes to the company’s disclosures regarding optional pre-payment of gratuities to avoid potential consumer confusion.

Royal Caribbean is a cruise line operating since 1969 with over 30 ships to over 200 destinations for trips of varying durations. At issue for the National Advertising Division (NAD) was whether Royal Caribbean’s advertising disclosed all mandatory fees and whether the overall net impression of Royal Caribbean’s advertising was misleading about the true all-in vacation cost.

During the inquiry, Royal Caribbean modified its online booking flow to clearly and conspicuously disclose that gratuities are optional, that customers may choose whether to prepay them, and that they may modify or remove gratuities at any time prior to disembarkation.

Therefore, NAD determined that Royal Caribbean’s booking flow adequately apprised consumers of the true all-in vacation cost by highlighting the lead price and prominently disclosing that gratuities are not mandatory but, rather, are optional. However, to avoid potential consumer confusion, NAD recommended that Royal Caribbean modify the gratuities information in the “learn more” tab to clearly and conspicuously disclose that gratuities are optional, and to clearly and conspicuously disclose that gratuities are optional on the final checkout page.

In its advertiser statement, Royal Caribbean “thanks NAD for its careful review” and “has implemented 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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.

McLean, VA – October 20, 2026 – BBB National Programs’ Digital Advertising Accountability Program (DAAP) has worked with Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. and four of its brands to bring their websites and mobile applications into compliance with the Digital Advertising Alliance’s (DAA) Self-Regulatory Principles for online interest-based advertising (IBA).

Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. is a global apparel retailer that operates UNIQLO, G.U. CO. LTD. (GU), Theory, and Helmut Lang.

As part of its routine monitoring, DAAP reviewed the online properties of UNIQLO and GU and observed data collection by third-party companies known to engage in IBA. DAAP identified potential issues concerning whether the websites and mobile applications provided consumers with the transparency and choice mechanisms required by the DAA Principles.

DAAP subsequently expanded its review to the websites of Fast Retailing’s Theory and Helmut Lang brands, and the mobile applications operated by UNIQLO, GU, and Theory.

The review found that the UNIQLO, GU, Theory, and Helmut Lang websites did not provide consumers with appropriate enhanced notice for IBA, that is, a clear and prominent link to information explaining data sharing for IBA and a mechanism to opt-out of such sharing. While privacy policies contained much of the information required under the DAA Principles, the information was scattered throughout the policies rather than presented in a clearly identified IBA disclosure. As a result, consumers may have had difficulty finding information about IBA and mechanisms available to exercise choice with respect to IBA.

DAAP also found that the UNIQLO, GU, and Theory mobile applications did not provide appropriate enhanced notice under the DAA’s Mobile Guidance. The apps did not provide clear and prominent access to IBA disclosures and choice mechanisms at the times and places contemplated by the Mobile Guidance, including through app settings. The apps’ use of an infinite scroll format also prevented users from readily reaching disclosures and opt-out links to privacy information located at the bottom of the screen.

In response to DAAP’s inquiry, Fast Retailing worked with DAAP to review the websites and mobile applications of all four brands and implemented a range of changes to strengthen transparency and consumer choice.

Enhanced Notice of Website Data Collection for IBA

To comply with the DAA Principles’ enhanced notice requirements, UNIQLO, GU, Theory, and Helmut Lang:

• Added an “Ad Choices” link to their website footers that is separate and distinct from each brand’s general privacy policy link and appears on every page of the website.
• Directed the “Ad Choices” link to the IBA section of each brand’s privacy policy to provide consumers with direct access to information about IBA and available choice mechanisms.
• Consolidated IBA-related information into a dedicated “Ad Choices” section of each brand’s privacy policy.

The updated “Ad Choices” sections explain IBA, include a statement of adherence to the DAA Principles, provide a functioning link to an industry-developed consumer choice mechanism, and explain how consumers can withdraw consent.

At DAAP’s recommendation, UNIQLO and GU also added a link at the top of their privacy policies directing consumers to the “Ad Choices” section.

Enhanced Notice for Third-Party Interest-Based Advertising

To comply with the DAA Mobile Guidance, UNIQLO and GU implemented changes to provide consumers with clearer and more prominent notice of cross-app data collection for IBA, including:

• Adding a link to an IBA disclosure and DAA consumer choice tools at the top of their mobile privacy policies.
• Eliminating the infinite scroll feature that had prevented users from readily reaching menu and footer links, including links to privacy information.
• Adding “Ad Choices” to their in-app settings, giving users ongoing access to IBA disclosures and choice mechanisms after downloading the apps.
• Adding links within their IBA disclosures to the DAA’s consumer choice tools, including Ad Choices.
• Updating their iOS and Android app store listings with privacy policy links directing users to the top of their Privacy Notices, where consumers can more easily access the IBA disclosures.

Theory eliminated the infinite scroll feature from its app, added “Ad Choices” to its in-app settings, and added a link to the DAA’s consumer choice tools in its mobile privacy policy.

Helmut Lang does not offer a mobile application.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. To access all DAAP decisions, visit the DAAP decisions webpage.  

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 20 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 fair competition 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 Digital Advertising Accountability Program: The Digital Advertising Accountability Program (DAAP), a division of BBB National Programs, was developed by the Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) to enforce industry self-regulation principles for data privacy in online and mobile advertising, holding companies accountable to the DAA’s Privacy Principles. DAAP provides guidance to companies looking to comply with industry principles and responds to complaints filed by consumers about online privacy. 

McLean, VA – October 20, 2026 – BBB National Programs’ Digital Advertising Accountability Program (DAAP) has worked with Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. and four of its brands to bring their websites and mobile applications into compliance with the Digital Advertising Alliance’s (DAA) Self-Regulatory Principles for online interest-based advertising (IBA).

Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. is a global apparel retailer that operates UNIQLO, G.U. CO. LTD. (GU), Theory, and Helmut Lang.

As part of its routine monitoring, DAAP reviewed the online properties of UNIQLO and GU and observed data collection by third-party companies known to engage in IBA. DAAP identified potential issues concerning whether the websites and mobile applications provided consumers with the transparency and choice mechanisms required by the DAA Principles.

DAAP subsequently expanded its review to the websites of Fast Retailing’s Theory and Helmut Lang brands, and the mobile applications operated by UNIQLO, GU, and Theory.

The review found that the UNIQLO, GU, Theory, and Helmut Lang websites did not provide consumers with appropriate enhanced notice for IBA, that is, a clear and prominent link to information explaining data sharing for IBA and a mechanism to opt-out of such sharing. While privacy policies contained much of the information required under the DAA Principles, the information was scattered throughout the policies rather than presented in a clearly identified IBA disclosure. As a result, consumers may have had difficulty finding information about IBA and mechanisms available to exercise choice with respect to IBA.

DAAP also found that the UNIQLO, GU, and Theory mobile applications did not provide appropriate enhanced notice under the DAA’s Mobile Guidance. The apps did not provide clear and prominent access to IBA disclosures and choice mechanisms at the times and places contemplated by the Mobile Guidance, including through app settings. The apps’ use of an infinite scroll format also prevented users from readily reaching disclosures and opt-out links to privacy information located at the bottom of the screen.

In response to DAAP’s inquiry, Fast Retailing worked with DAAP to review the websites and mobile applications of all four brands and implemented a range of changes to strengthen transparency and consumer choice.

Enhanced Notice of Website Data Collection for IBA

To comply with the DAA Principles’ enhanced notice requirements, UNIQLO, GU, Theory, and Helmut Lang:

• Added an “Ad Choices” link to their website footers that is separate and distinct from each brand’s general privacy policy link and appears on every page of the website.
• Directed the “Ad Choices” link to the IBA section of each brand’s privacy policy to provide consumers with direct access to information about IBA and available choice mechanisms.
• Consolidated IBA-related information into a dedicated “Ad Choices” section of each brand’s privacy policy.

The updated “Ad Choices” sections explain IBA, include a statement of adherence to the DAA Principles, provide a functioning link to an industry-developed consumer choice mechanism, and explain how consumers can withdraw consent.

At DAAP’s recommendation, UNIQLO and GU also added a link at the top of their privacy policies directing consumers to the “Ad Choices” section.

Enhanced Notice for Third-Party Interest-Based Advertising

To comply with the DAA Mobile Guidance, UNIQLO and GU implemented changes to provide consumers with clearer and more prominent notice of cross-app data collection for IBA, including:

• Adding a link to an IBA disclosure and DAA consumer choice tools at the top of their mobile privacy policies.
• Eliminating the infinite scroll feature that had prevented users from readily reaching menu and footer links, including links to privacy information.
• Adding “Ad Choices” to their in-app settings, giving users ongoing access to IBA disclosures and choice mechanisms after downloading the apps.
• Adding links within their IBA disclosures to the DAA’s consumer choice tools, including Ad Choices.
• Updating their iOS and Android app store listings with privacy policy links directing users to the top of their Privacy Notices, where consumers can more easily access the IBA disclosures.

Theory eliminated the infinite scroll feature from its app, added “Ad Choices” to its in-app settings, and added a link to the DAA’s consumer choice tools in its mobile privacy policy.

Helmut Lang does not offer a mobile application.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. To access all DAAP decisions, visit the DAAP decisions webpage.  

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 20 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 fair competition 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 Digital Advertising Accountability Program: The Digital Advertising Accountability Program (DAAP), a division of BBB National Programs, was developed by the Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) to enforce industry self-regulation principles for data privacy in online and mobile advertising, holding companies accountable to the DAA’s Privacy Principles. DAAP provides guidance to companies looking to comply with industry principles and responds to complaints filed by consumers about online privacy. 

New report finds telemarketing filings rose 63%, credit reporting filings increased 44%, and damage awards climbed 35% to $7.5 billion in 2025

San Jose, CA, October 20, 2026 — LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional today released the Lex Machina^® 2026 Consumer Protection Litigation Report, which finds that federal consumer protection filings rose 31% to 20,353 in 2025, the highest annual total in the ten-year period studied. More than 12,000 new lawsuits filed in the first half of 2026, putting annual filings on pace to rise again.

Drawing on powerful litigation data and exclusive insights from Lex Machina^®, the LexisNexis^® Legal Analytics^® platform, the report examines federal district and circuit litigation involving credit reporting, debt collection, telemarketing, data breaches, and other consumer disputes. It focuses on 2023 through 2025, with historical comparisons dating to 2016 and observations from the first half of 2026.

The analysis explores trends in 165,443 consumer protection cases in federal district courts and 8,502 federal circuit court cases docketed from 2016 through 2025, plus observations for cases filed so far in 2026. It includes hard numbers that capture the timing, outcomes, findings, and damage awards for each case, along with the experience of the attorneys, law firms, judges, and litigants involved.

Three major shifts stood out in 2025:

• Telephone Consumer Protection Act filings jumped 63%. Plaintiffs filed 2,748 cases alleging TCPA violations, up from 1,682 in 2024. The upswing continued into the first half of 2026, when plaintiffs filed another 1,658 TCPA lawsuits.

• Fair Credit Reporting Act filings rose 44%. FCRA cases reached 7,750, an increase of 2,386 over 2024. These cases accounted for approximately 38% of federal consumer protection filings in 2025, compared with 19% in 2016. Plaintiffs filed 4,986 additional FCRA cases in the first half of 2026.

• Fewer cases produced substantially higher damage awards. Recorded principal damage awards increased 35% to approximately $7.5 billion, excluding costs, fees, expenses, and interest. The number of cases with awards declined from 452 in 2024 to 437 in 2025. A single $2.5 billion consent judgment accounted for approximately one-third of the 2025 total.

“Data breach lawsuits rose 21% in 2025, a trend that matters to businesses across industries that handle sensitive consumer information,” said Eric Wright, senior vice president for Lex Machina at LexisNexis. “Companies and their law firms need to understand how similar disputes have progressed and what drove their outcomes. Lex Machina makes those insights easy to find and apply, helping legal teams assess exposure, plan litigation budgets, and develop informed strategies for motions, trials, appeals, and settlement negotiations.”

To request a copy of the report, visit LexisNexis.com/LexMachina.

The Lex Machina platform equips litigation professionals to develop stronger case strategies and generate business. From precise timing metrics that inform legal budgeting to trend data on top law firms and leading judges, Lex Machina supplements traditional legal research and experience with customized, data-backed insights. These insights help lawyers identify and pursue new matters, navigate motion and trial strategies, and negotiate smarter settlements, ultimately giving firms a competitive edge in litigation.

About LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional 

LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional provides AI-powered legal, regulatory, business information, analytics and workflows that help customers increase their productivity, improve decision-making, achieve better outcomes, and advance the rule of law around the world. As a digital pioneer, the company was the first to bring legal and business information online with its Lexis^® and Nexis^® services. LexisNexis Legal & Professional, which serves customers in more than 150 countries with 11,900 employees worldwide, is part of RELX, a global provider of information-based analytics and decision tools for professional and business customers.

About Lex Machina 

Lex Machina^® fundamentally changes how companies and law firms compete in the business and practice of law. The company provides strategic insights on judges, lawyers, law firms, parties, and other critical information across 22 federal practice areas and a rapidly growing number of state courts. Lex Machina allows law firms and companies to anticipate the behaviors and outcomes that different legal strategies will produce, supporting more effective case strategy and business development efforts.

Lex Machina was named Winner of the “Overall LegalTech Data Solution Provider of the Year” LegalTech Breakthrough Award 2025, “Best Data Analytics & Insight Solution” 2025 CODiE Award, and Winner of the “Media Excellence Award” for Analytics/Big Data 2024. Based in Silicon Valley, Lex Machina is part of LexisNexis^®, a leading global provider of legal, regulatory, and business information and analytics. For more information, please visit https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lex-machina.page.

Media Contact

Venture PR lexmachina@venturepr.co

New York, NY – October 5, 2026 – BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined, as part of its routine monitoring program, that Blissy, LLC supported its “Less Frizz” claim for Blissy Silk Pillowcases in context, however, it recommended Blissy modify or discontinue certain claims concerning hair breakage and tangles, anti-aging and wrinkle prevention, acne, clinical study results, and dermatologist endorsements.

Blissy is a consumer products company that offers silk sleep and beauty products. The National Advertising Division (NAD) inquired about claims appearing on Blissy’s website that   using Blissy silk pillowcases results in less hair frizz and no hair breakage or tangles, prevents signs of aging and the formation of new fine lines and wrinkles, and fights acne, as well as claims concerning quantified clinical-study results and dermatologist endorsements.

“Less Frizz”

To support the challenged “Less Frizz” claim, Blissy submitted laboratory testing on prepared hair samples as well as home-use studies in which consumers reported their perceptions after using Blissy pillowcases. NAD determined that the evidence supported the general “Less Frizz” claim.

“Breakage-Free” and “Tangle-Free” Claims

NAD found that consumers could understand the express “Breakage-Free” and “Tangle-Free” claims to convey that the use of Blissy pillowcases completely prevents hair breakage and tangles while sleeping. To support these claims, Blissy submitted a study that NAD found was not a good fit for the challenged claims. NAD recommended that Blissy discontinue both claims or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the unsupported message that the use of its pillowcases completely prevents hair breakage or tangles while sleeping.

Anti-aging and Wrinkle Claims

NAD found that the claims “Anti-aging,” “Wrinkle-Preventing,” and related language reasonably convey that using Blissy pillowcases combats signs of skin aging and prevents additional facial wrinkles.

NAD found that the studies submitted were not sufficient to support Blissy’s broad unqualified claims regarding anti-aging and wrinkle prevention. Therefore, NAD recommended that Blissy discontinue the claims “Anti-aging” and “Prevents Signs of Aging … preventing the formation of new fine lines and wrinkles as you sleep,” and modify its advertising to avoid conveying that using Blissy pillowcases prevents additional facial wrinkles.

Acne Claims

NAD found that Blissy’s “acne-fighting” claims reasonably convey that using Blissy helps prevent or reduce acne breakouts. In support of the claims, Blissy submitted a study testing whether its silk material clogs pores. NAD determined that the study was not a good fit for the unqualified claims and recommended that Blissy discontinue the “acne-fighting” claims and modify its advertising to avoid conveying that using Blissy pillowcases help prevent or reduce acne breakouts.

Clinical Study Results Claims

NAD next considered claims in a section of Blissy’s website featuring written and video endorsements from four individuals identified as board-certified dermatologists, in which the endorsers referred to clinical studies and specific quantified skin and hair results. NAD determined that these statements are establishment claims requiring advertisers to possess the scientific evidence represented by the claims. NAD found that Blissy’s evidence could not support the claims and recommended that Blissy discontinue the claims or modify its advertising to avoid conveying that clinical testing established the advertised outcomes and percentages.

Dermatologist Expert Endorsements

NAD considered the implied claim that the dermatologist endorsers used their expertise to evaluate Blissy’s clinical testing and found it reliable, and determined that the endorsements conveyed that message. Because Blissy’s studies did not support the specific outcomes, percentages, and timeframes stated in the endorsements, NAD recommended that Blissy discontinue or modify the endorsements accordingly.

During the inquiry, Blissy voluntarily agreed to discontinue the express claims “90% of people had … fewer blocked pores after using these pillowcases” and “90% had … fewer blocked pores.” The voluntarily discontinued claims will be treated, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.

In its advertiser statement, Blissy stated it “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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.

New York, NY – October 5, 2026 – BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined, as part of its routine monitoring program, that Blissy, LLC supported its “Less Frizz” claim for Blissy Silk Pillowcases in context, however, it recommended Blissy modify or discontinue certain claims concerning hair breakage and tangles, anti-aging and wrinkle prevention, acne, clinical study results, and dermatologist endorsements.

Blissy is a consumer products company that offers silk sleep and beauty products. The National Advertising Division (NAD) inquired about claims appearing on Blissy’s website that   using Blissy silk pillowcases results in less hair frizz and no hair breakage or tangles, prevents signs of aging and the formation of new fine lines and wrinkles, and fights acne, as well as claims concerning quantified clinical-study results and dermatologist endorsements.

“Less Frizz”

To support the challenged “Less Frizz” claim, Blissy submitted laboratory testing on prepared hair samples as well as home-use studies in which consumers reported their perceptions after using Blissy pillowcases. NAD determined that the evidence supported the general “Less Frizz” claim.

“Breakage-Free” and “Tangle-Free” Claims

NAD found that consumers could understand the express “Breakage-Free” and “Tangle-Free” claims to convey that the use of Blissy pillowcases completely prevents hair breakage and tangles while sleeping. To support these claims, Blissy submitted a study that NAD found was not a good fit for the challenged claims. NAD recommended that Blissy discontinue both claims or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the unsupported message that the use of its pillowcases completely prevents hair breakage or tangles while sleeping.

Anti-aging and Wrinkle Claims

NAD found that the claims “Anti-aging,” “Wrinkle-Preventing,” and related language reasonably convey that using Blissy pillowcases combats signs of skin aging and prevents additional facial wrinkles.

NAD found that the studies submitted were not sufficient to support Blissy’s broad unqualified claims regarding anti-aging and wrinkle prevention. Therefore, NAD recommended that Blissy discontinue the claims “Anti-aging” and “Prevents Signs of Aging … preventing the formation of new fine lines and wrinkles as you sleep,” and modify its advertising to avoid conveying that using Blissy pillowcases prevents additional facial wrinkles.

Acne Claims

NAD found that Blissy’s “acne-fighting” claims reasonably convey that using Blissy helps prevent or reduce acne breakouts. In support of the claims, Blissy submitted a study testing whether its silk material clogs pores. NAD determined that the study was not a good fit for the unqualified claims and recommended that Blissy discontinue the “acne-fighting” claims and modify its advertising to avoid conveying that using Blissy pillowcases help prevent or reduce acne breakouts.

Clinical Study Results Claims

NAD next considered claims in a section of Blissy’s website featuring written and video endorsements from four individuals identified as board-certified dermatologists, in which the endorsers referred to clinical studies and specific quantified skin and hair results. NAD determined that these statements are establishment claims requiring advertisers to possess the scientific evidence represented by the claims. NAD found that Blissy’s evidence could not support the claims and recommended that Blissy discontinue the claims or modify its advertising to avoid conveying that clinical testing established the advertised outcomes and percentages.

Dermatologist Expert Endorsements

NAD considered the implied claim that the dermatologist endorsers used their expertise to evaluate Blissy’s clinical testing and found it reliable, and determined that the endorsements conveyed that message. Because Blissy’s studies did not support the specific outcomes, percentages, and timeframes stated in the endorsements, NAD recommended that Blissy discontinue or modify the endorsements accordingly.

During the inquiry, Blissy voluntarily agreed to discontinue the express claims “90% of people had … fewer blocked pores after using these pillowcases” and “90% had … fewer blocked pores.” The voluntarily discontinued claims will be treated, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.

In its advertiser statement, Blissy stated it “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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.

New York, NY – October 1, 2026 – Following a challenge brought by Charter Communications, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that T-Mobile US, Inc. provided support for certain comparative claims regarding T-Mobile Fiber (T-Fiber). However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim “Break free from big cable contracts.”

Charter and T-Mobile compete in the home internet market, with Charter offering residential service under the Spectrum brand via hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) and fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) networks, and T-Mobile offering FTTH through T-Fiber.

Traditional Cable Internet

Spectrum argued that T-Mobile’s advertising expressly contrasts fiber internet with “traditional cable internet” and that T-Mobile’s use of the phrase “cable internet” in the challenged advertising reasonably encompasses internet service offered over modern HFC networks by cable providers such as Spectrum.

NAD determined that the challenged advertising expressly frames the comparison as one between T-Fiber or fiber technology and traditional cable internet, which refers to services that employ hybrid fiber coaxial.

Speed Claims

Spectrum challenged claims that T-Fiber provides “up to gigabit upload and download speeds,” while cable internet has “uploads slower than downloads,” and that “cable internet often has slower upload speeds,” and “with fiber internet, you get significantly more uploading power than with most cable internet options.”

NAD determined that the speed comparison claims are supported as qualified descriptions of traditional cable internet generally and that the claim that fiber provides “significantly more uploading power than most cable internet options” is supported by the evidence regarding the prevalence of asymmetrical cable tiers and the limited availability of symmetrical upgraded HFC service.

Latency Claims

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber provides “ultra-low latency, perfect for gaming and video calls,” while cable internet has “higher latency due to older coaxial cables.”

NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that T-Fiber offers lower latency than traditional cable internet and provides a performance advantage for gaming and video calls. NAD determined that the challenged claims were supported.

Peak-Hour Performance Claims

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours,” while cable internet “can slow down during peak hours due to shared bandwidth.”

NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that users of Spectrum’s traditional cable internet service can experience some reduction in performance during peak periods but does not convey the message that Spectrum customers will always experience a material slowdown or that Spectrum Internet becomes unreliable during peak periods. Accordingly, NAD determined the qualified statement that cable internet “can” slow down during peak hours is supported. NAD also found the claim that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours” was supported.

Scalability and Future-Proofing Claims

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s scalability and future-proofing claims, “Future-proof technology built for growing data demands,” “Limited scalability due to coaxial cable technology,” and “Fiber is built for the future, with fast upload and download speeds, whole-home coverage, and bandwidth for all your devices.” NAD determined that consumers are likely to understand the challenged claim as referring to the relative technological capabilities of fiber and traditional cable infrastructure, rather than to the pace or scope of a provider’s network investments. NAD found the challenged claims supported.

“Break Free From Big Cable Contracts”

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s advertising encouraging consumers to “Break free from big cable contracts” and offering to pay early termination fees. NAD determined that the headline, viewed together with the comparison to cable internet, reasonably conveys a broader message that major cable internet providers generally, and Spectrum in particular, require contracts from which consumers need to be freed and that they impose early termination fees.

NAD found that the broader message is not supported and recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim to avoid conveying the unsupported message that big cable internet providers, including Spectrum, necessarily require long-term contracts or impose early termination fees.

In its advertiser statement, T-Mobile stated that it “will comply with NAD’s recommendation.”

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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.

New York, NY – October 1, 2026 – Following a challenge brought by Charter Communications, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that T-Mobile US, Inc. provided support for certain comparative claims regarding T-Mobile Fiber (T-Fiber). However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim “Break free from big cable contracts.”

Charter and T-Mobile compete in the home internet market, with Charter offering residential service under the Spectrum brand via hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) and fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) networks, and T-Mobile offering FTTH through T-Fiber.

Traditional Cable Internet

Spectrum argued that T-Mobile’s advertising expressly contrasts fiber internet with “traditional cable internet” and that T-Mobile’s use of the phrase “cable internet” in the challenged advertising reasonably encompasses internet service offered over modern HFC networks by cable providers such as Spectrum.

NAD determined that the challenged advertising expressly frames the comparison as one between T-Fiber or fiber technology and traditional cable internet, which refers to services that employ hybrid fiber coaxial.

Speed Claims

Spectrum challenged claims that T-Fiber provides “up to gigabit upload and download speeds,” while cable internet has “uploads slower than downloads,” and that “cable internet often has slower upload speeds,” and “with fiber internet, you get significantly more uploading power than with most cable internet options.”

NAD determined that the speed comparison claims are supported as qualified descriptions of traditional cable internet generally and that the claim that fiber provides “significantly more uploading power than most cable internet options” is supported by the evidence regarding the prevalence of asymmetrical cable tiers and the limited availability of symmetrical upgraded HFC service.

Latency Claims

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber provides “ultra-low latency, perfect for gaming and video calls,” while cable internet has “higher latency due to older coaxial cables.”

NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that T-Fiber offers lower latency than traditional cable internet and provides a performance advantage for gaming and video calls. NAD determined that the challenged claims were supported.

Peak-Hour Performance Claims

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours,” while cable internet “can slow down during peak hours due to shared bandwidth.”

NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that users of Spectrum’s traditional cable internet service can experience some reduction in performance during peak periods but does not convey the message that Spectrum customers will always experience a material slowdown or that Spectrum Internet becomes unreliable during peak periods. Accordingly, NAD determined the qualified statement that cable internet “can” slow down during peak hours is supported. NAD also found the claim that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours” was supported.

Scalability and Future-Proofing Claims

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s scalability and future-proofing claims, “Future-proof technology built for growing data demands,” “Limited scalability due to coaxial cable technology,” and “Fiber is built for the future, with fast upload and download speeds, whole-home coverage, and bandwidth for all your devices.” NAD determined that consumers are likely to understand the challenged claim as referring to the relative technological capabilities of fiber and traditional cable infrastructure, rather than to the pace or scope of a provider’s network investments. NAD found the challenged claims supported.

“Break Free From Big Cable Contracts”

Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s advertising encouraging consumers to “Break free from big cable contracts” and offering to pay early termination fees. NAD determined that the headline, viewed together with the comparison to cable internet, reasonably conveys a broader message that major cable internet providers generally, and Spectrum in particular, require contracts from which consumers need to be freed and that they impose early termination fees.

NAD found that the broader message is not supported and recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim to avoid conveying the unsupported message that big cable internet providers, including Spectrum, necessarily require long-term contracts or impose early termination fees.

In its advertiser statement, T-Mobile stated that it “will comply with NAD’s recommendation.”

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. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

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 20 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 fair competition 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 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 creating fair competition for business.