NAD Refers Advertising by GreenFiber to FTC After Company Declines to Participate in NAD Proceeding

New York, NY – Aug. 20, 2013 – The National Advertising Division has referred advertising claims made by GreenFiber, LLC, for its cellulose insulation to the Federal Trade Commission for further review. The company declined to participate in a review of its advertising claims.

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

Claims made on product packaging, and in point-of-sale materials and website advertising were challenged by Johns Manville, a competing maker of insulation.

Claims at issue included:

  •  “GreenFiber”
  •  “environmentally friendly”
  •  “eco-friendly”
  •  “non-toxic”
  •  “no harmful chemicals”
  •  “natural” or “all natural”
  •  claim that fiber glass is as harmful as asbestos and formaldehyde
  •  claim that only cellulose insulation can be installed with “zero waste”
  •  “Proven 57% More Fire Resistant vs. Fiberglass”

The challenger argued that GreenFiber’s product name, the pervasive “green” imagery used in advertising and the “environmentally friendly” claims found on its product packaging, point-of-sale material, and website, all conveyed an unqualified message of general environmental benefit that is misleading to consumers.

GreenFiber declined to participate in the NAD proceeding, arguing that prior to Johns Manville’s challenge, it had already committed to modifying seven of the nine express claims challenged. GreenFiber contended that Johns Manville’s objections to its “fire resistance” claim was frivolous and argued that the fire resistance issue were of such a technical character that NAD could not conduct a meaningful analysis.

While NAD appreciated the advertiser’s representation that it would discontinue or modify some of the challenged claims, NAD noted that the advertiser declined to participate in the self-regulatory proceeding and intended to continue disseminating two of the challenged claims. In light of the advertiser’s position, NAD referred the matter to the FTC for possible law enforcement action.

 

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 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
Decision

Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council Recommends Valentus Discontinue Earnings and Product Performance Claims

McLean, VA – December 23, 2024 – The Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council (DSSRC) recommended Valentus, a direct selling company that sells nutritional and lifestyle products, discontinue earnings and health-related product performance claims made on social media and on the Valentus website.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council Refers Olive Tree Earnings Claims to the FTC and California AG for Possible Enforcement Action

McLean, VA – December 20, 2024 – The Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council (DSSRC) referred Olive Tree to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and California Attorney General's Office for possible enforcement action after Olive Tree failed to respond to a DSSRC inquiry into earnings claims.  

Read the Decision Summary