NAD Determines Anheuser-Busch Can Support ‘Light’ Claim for ‘Michelob ULTRA Light Cider’

New York, NY – Feb. 5, 2013 – The National Advertising Division has determined that Anheuser-Busch, LLC, can support the claim that its Michelob ULTRA Light Cider has one-third fewer calories than an average of “the leading regular ciders.”

NAD is an investigative unit of the advertising industry’s system of self-regulation. It is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

The advertiser in this case made the claim that its Light Cider has “1/3 less calories than an average of the leading regular hard ciders.”

As the advertiser noted, and NAD agreed, the claim adheres to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations for nutrient content claims under the FDA Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 (NLEA).

As an initial matter, NAD determined that it had jurisdiction to review the challenged claims.

NLEA sets forth regulations regarding the use of “light” claims as follows: A product may be described as “light” if, in relevant part, (1) the food derives less than 50 percent of its calories from fat and (2) the number of calories is reduced by at least one-third … compared to an appropriate reference food.” Claims that use “language mandated or expressly approved by federal law or regulation” do not fall within NAD’s jurisdiction.

NAD was not, however, examining whether the FDA definition of light was appropriate.   Rather, NAD asked the advertiser to provide support its claim that its product had one-third fewer calories than an average of the leading regular hard ciders.

In reviewing A-B’s support for its claims, NAD considered Michelob ULTRA Light Cider’s calorie content, the calorie content of the leading regular hard ciders, the market share of the leading regular hard ciders, and whether A-B’s claim provides meaningful and accurate information to consumers.

Following its review of the evidence in the record, NAD determined that the advertiser had provided a reasonable basis for the claim.

Anheuser-Busch, in its advertiser’s statement, said the company “is pleased with NAD’s decision and appreciates NAD’s careful attention to the issues addressed.”

 

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 Finds Charter’s “Unlimited” Claims Supported; Recommends Clear & Conspicuous Speed Limitation Disclosures

New York, NY – January 7, 2025 – The National Advertising Division found that Charter substantiated certain express and implied claims about its Spectrum Mobile “Unlimited” and “Unlimited Plus” wireless data plans but recommended that Charter modify its website advertising to disclose high speed data...

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends Solawave Discontinue Certain Claims for its Advanced Skincare Wand

New York, NY – January 6, 2025 – As part of its routine monitoring process, the National Advertising Division recommended Solawave discontinue certain express and implied claims for its SolaWave Advanced Skincare Wand.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends Oral Essentials Discontinue "Certified Non-Toxic" Claim for its Lumineux Mouthwash

New York, NY – December 30, 2024 – In a Fast-Track SWIFT challenge brought by GuruNanda, the National Advertising Division recommended that Oral Essentials discontinue its claim that Lumineux mouthwash products are “Certified Non-Toxic.” 

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

NARB Recommends T-Mobile Discontinue or Modify Commercial to Better Disclose Conditions of Free iPhone Offer, 20% Savings Claim

New York, NY – December 30, 2024 – A panel of the National Advertising Review Board (NARB) recommended that T-Mobile discontinue or modify its commercial to better disclose the material conditions of its free iPhone 16 Pro offer and its 20% rate plan savings claim compared to AT&T and Verizon. 

Read the Decision Summary