Endorsements by public figures, influencers, celebrities etc. go a long way in promoting a product and it is imperative for them to act with responsibility, the Court said.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday warned that social media influencers and celebrities would be equally responsible and liable if they are found endorsing products or services in misleading advertisements.
A Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah noted that there are Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) guidelines which call for influencers to be transparent about paid endorsements.
The Court went on to observe:
“We are of the opinion that the advertisers or the advertising agencies or endorsers are equally responsible for issuing false and misleading advertisements. Endorsements by public figures, influencers, celebrities etc. go a long way in promoting a product and it is imperative for them to act with responsibility when endorsing any product in the course of advertisements.”
The Court has emphasised that influencers and celebrities should ensure that they comply with CCPA guidelines while endorsing any product and should not abuse the trust placed in them by the public.
“They have to take responsibility for advertisements as contemplated in guideline 8 (ads that target or use children) and guideline 12 (duties of manufacturers, service providers and ad agency) to ensure that the trust of the consumer is not abused or exploited due to sheer lack of knowledge or experience. Guideline 13 requires due responsibility to be taken for advertisements and requires a person who endorses a product to have adequate information or experience with the specific food product to be endorsed, and it must be ensured that it is not deceptive,” the Court said.
The Court added that these CCPA guidelines and other provisions under the Consumer Protection Act are meant to ensure that the consumer is aware of the products purchased from the market, particularly in the health and food sectors.
The Court made these observations while dealing with a case filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali Ayurved over misleading ads published by Patanjali which disparaged modern medicine.
The Court’s focus in this case was initially on Patanjali’s misleading ads (which the Court later imposed a temporary ban on), the failure of regulatory authorities to act against Patanjali, and the corrective steps to be taken by Patanjali and its promoters (Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna).
However, the Court’s attention was later drawn to several larger issues, including misleading advertisements by other consumer goods suppliers as well as unethical practices in modern medicine.
The Court today passed a slew of directions on these aspects today (click here to read more).
Advertisers need to give self-declaration before publishing ads: Court
The Court has also passed an interim “tide-over” order directing TV broadcasters and print media to file self-declaration forms assuring that any advertisement published or broadcast on their platform conforms to the laws in India, such as the Cable TV Network Rules of 1994 and the Advertising Code.
This self-declaration form is to be filed before the advertisement is carried.
The Court clarified that it should be made easy for the advertisers to file these self-declaration forms and that there should be no red-tape involved in the process.
“We don’t want a lot of red tape there (in submission of self-declarations by Advertisers). We don’t want to make it difficult for advertisers to advertise. We only want to make sure there is responsibility,” the Court said.
The Court proceeded to order that TV broadcasters be made to file the self-declaration on the Broadcast Seva portal run by the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
