CARU Recommends Pokemon Modify Broadcast Ad To Better Disclose Products Included With Initial Purchase; Company Agrees To Do So

New York – July 27, 2011 – The Children’s Advertising Review Unit of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has recommended that The Pokemon Company International modify broadcast advertising for the Black & White Trading Card Game to better disclose which products come with the initial purchase. The advertiser has done so.

Advertising for the product came to the attention of CARU, the children’s advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, through CARU’s routine monitoring of advertising directed to children.

Pokemon’s Black & White Trading Card Game is similar to the original Pokemon Trading Card Game.  The cards are sold in packs; each represents a character with different powers and values and cards are worth more than others.

In the advertising at issue, an announcer stated that the game features

“70 new Pokemon” characters and more than “110 cards.” As the announcer said “110 cards,” an array of cards flashed across the screen.

The final shot in the commercial displayed a split screen, half black and half white, with two packs of cards on either side.  A brief audio voiceover at the end of the commercial stated, “Each booster pack of 10 cards, sold separately.  Cards vary by pack.” The audio disclosure was accompanied by a small written disclosure on the bottom of the screen stating the same.

Following its initial review, CARU questioned whether the written and audio disclosures were adequate.

In response to CARU’s inquiry, the advertiser stated that it immediately instructed that the ad be pulled from circulation and asserted that it would improve the quality, duration and volume of the audio disclosure and increase the text size of the written disclosure.

Pokemon, in its advertiser’s statement, said “[W]e appreciate CARU’s careful consideration of the issues raised in this matter and accept CARU’s decision. We ceased airing the commercial in question immediately upon receiving notification from CARU that it had concerns and reworked it to make sure those concerns were addressed. We will take CARU’s guidelines into account for all future advertising.”

 

Subscribe to the Ad Law Insights or Privacy Initiatives newsletters for an exclusive monthly analysis and insider perspectives on the latest trends and case decisions in advertising law and data privacy.

 

 

 

 

Latest Decisions

Decision

National Advertising Division Refers Home Chef to Federal Trade Commission

New York, NY – January 13, 2025 – Based on Relish Labs, LLC d/b/a Home Chef’s failure to address compliance concerns from a previous inquiry, BBB National Program’s National Advertising Division has referred Home Chef to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in accordance with its procedures.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Refers “Made in USA” Claims by Larose Industries d/b/a Roseart and Cra-Z-Art to the Federal Trade Commission

New York, NY – January 10, 2025 – The National Advertising Division referred advertising claims by Larose Industries, operating under the names Roseart and Cra-Z-Art, that its products are “Made in USA” to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) after Larose Industries failed to respond to the inquiry.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends T-Mobile Discontinue or Modify 20% Savings vs. ‘The Other Big Guys’ Claim; T-Mobile to Appeal

New York, NY – January 9, 2025 – The National Advertising Division recommended that T-Mobile discontinue or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the comparative claim that consumers can “save 20% every month vs. the other big guys” if they subscribe to T-Mobile in markets where Spectrum Mobile also...

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

In National Advertising Division Fast-Track SWIFT Challenge Behr Voluntarily Discontinues “No Comparable Product” Claim

New York, NY – January 8, 2025 – In a National Advertising Division Fast-Track SWIFT challenge brought by Benjamin Moore, Behr voluntarily discontinued its “No Comparable Product” claim.

Read the Decision Summary