NARB ProgramBackgrounds

National Advertising Review Board

The National Advertising Review Board (NARB) is the advertising self-regulation industry’s appellate body. Five-member NARB panels hear cases appealing an NAD or CARU decision and provide independent industry peer review, ensuring truthfulness and accuracy in national advertising and helping promote voluntary compliance of its decisions—a key pillar of industry self-regulation.  

Program Impact

NARB, established in 1971 as a fair and impartial appellate body, reviews appealed NAD or CARU decisions. Nominated by various leading organizations in the advertising industry, NARB members are selected for their stature and experience in their fields. 

 

 

Truth & Transparency

When a competitor’s advertising harms consumer trust or threatens a company’s reputation and market share, the advertising self-regulatory system creates a level-playing field for business and helps ensure consumers receive truthful and accurate advertising.

Compliance

After a decision, NARB or the challenger can check in on whether the advertiser has made appropriate modifications to its advertising and has 10 days to respond. The case is closed if there is a good faith effort to bring their advertising into compliance.

Non-Compliance

In cases of lack of good faith efforts to modify or discontinue advertising as a result of a NARB decision, NARB will refer the case to an appropriate government agency, usually the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
 

For the last 50 years in the advertising industry, companies have held each other to a higher standard. In response to the pressures and criticisms of consumerism that had mounted during the previous decade, in 1971 the advertising industry established the National Advertising Division (NAD) and National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the U.S. mechanism of independent self-regulation that has stood the test of time and technological innovation.

 

Visit NAD50th.org

Guidelines & Procedures


Any advertiser or challenger has the right to appeal NAD’s decision to NARB.  An advertiser has an automatic right of appeal. A challenger must request permission to appeal from the NARB chair and explain why it believes there is a substantial likelihood NARB would come to a different conclusion on a case than NAD. 

 

News & Blog

Press Release

Media Advisory: FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter to Keynote National Advertising Division “Future of Ad Law” 2021 Annual Conference

New York, NY – September 21, 2021 – In its 50th anniversary year, the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs will host the NAD 2021 Annual Conference virtually next week, running Wednesday, September 29 through Friday, October 1. Members of the media are invited to cover NAD 2021 with...

Read More
Press Release

BBB National Programs Announces 85 Distinguished Members of 2021 National Advertising Review Board Panel

McLean, VA – January 5, 2021 – BBB National Programs today announced the 2021 Panel Pool Members for its National Advertising Review Board, the appellate body for the U.S. advertising industry’s system of self-regulation. The National Advertising Review Board panel pool members, selected for their stature and experience in their fields,...
Read Press Release

Why Independent Industry Self-Regulation Is Timelier Than Ever

Sep 21, 2021, 09:00 AM by Eric D. Reicin, President & CEO, BBB National Programs
Although advertising’s platforms, technology, and techniques have changed dramatically, the system of independent industry self-regulation has sustained, and thrived, proving itself as an adaptable model to evolving business environments. Today, that model of responsible businesses allowing themselves to be held publicly accountable by independent self-regulation is timelier than ever.
The business environment is a confounding one. On the one hand, the 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer survey shows the business sector to be the most trusted “institution” in America. Yet, President Joe Biden recently announced a new executive order appealing to government agencies to take 72 different actions to rein in corporations.

Gerald F. Seib recently wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal that caught my eye. Among his many insights was: “The Republican and Democratic parties are both undergoing a historic transformation, which increasingly makes the business community a political orphan, without a comfortable home in either party.” 

Given the “pushback” that corporations are getting right now in Washington, D.C. — by both political parties — how should organizations respond? For decades, the most responsible companies have found virtue in committing to industry-wide shifts in behavior through participating in independent self-regulation. In light of today’s political environment, independent industry self-regulation may be timelier than ever.

Industry-wide efforts to self-regulate go beyond politics. They reflect a commitment to actual and sustainable change, even more so than individual company choices do. After all, building a consensus around best practices through a trusted institutional process can lead to more collaborative and widespread adoption by industry members, in contrast to unilateral action by lone players.

At BBB National Programs, the nonprofit organization I am proud to lead, we have seen firsthand how industry and nonprofit leaders can collaborate to tackle issues that affect not just businesses, but our society. For instance, our National Advertising Division and its truth-in-advertising case decisions have offered a road map for truthful advertising. Nearly 90% of the time advertisers accept the case decisions rendered by the National Advertising Division or its appellate body, the National Advertising Review Board. If not, the case is referred to the Federal Trade Commission or other government agency for potential enforcement action.

Of course, the path to creating an independent industry self-regulation program can sometimes have twists and turns. That’s almost always because the issues to be dealt with are complex and evolving.

Take the issue of how organizations treat teens' data. Much of that conversation is framed in the terms we use for children. Some regulators and legislators talk of expanding the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) to cover teenagers. Other countries and jurisdictions are pursuing different routes. After many conversations with our stakeholders — and based on the research on teen-directed mobile app privacy conducted by our monitoring team — we believe this notion of “having COPPA cover teens” represents a critical mis-framing of the teenage privacy issue. Not only are teens tech-savvy enough to evade parental consent requirements, but their privacy needs are different from those who are under 13.

Certainly, teens represent a powerful market segment. A recent Piper Sandler report shows that, despite their relative lack of earnings, the average teen spent more than $2,100 in 2020. Moreover, a recent National Retail Federation report suggests that teens also have significant influence over shopping and purchasing decisions for families. As media consumption has shifted in past decades, teens are also driving consumer trends in a way never seen. What starts as a TikTok trend may just end up defining the success or failure of a brand for years to come.

All of this makes teens’ personal data a valuable commodity. But if there is anything we have learned from our privacy self-regulatory programs, it is that personal data must be respected in transparent and accountable ways.

So, on behalf of our stakeholders, we ask the following:

  • How can we do this effectively for the teenage segment?
  • How do we demonstrate to regulators an effective bridge for teenagers between the protections of COPPA and general consumer privacy protections?

 

Today’s vexing issues in teen privacy are a microcosm of larger issues facing businesses and the consumers they serve. In the Wall Street Journal article, Seib wrote: “With rising populists on the right and ascendant progressives on the left, the question for corporate leaders is how to respond.” 

That is a great question, for both corporate and nonprofit leaders. And I would add another question: How can corporate and nonprofit leaders champion transparency and truth for the communities they serve? 

  • Do not go it alone. When consumer trust in an industry is threatened, working alongside others might feel counterintuitive, but the most effective long-term solution to the threat will be crafted by those best positioned to identify how to make it realistic and sustainable. Working together demonstrates to the public that the involved organizations are dedicated to more than just a temporary or quick-fix patch.
  • Identify the problem. In the face of threatened or lost consumer trust, work with others in your industry or community to identify the underlying problem that needs solving. Sometimes this effort is led by a trusted industry member association, a coalition of varying complexity, or a nonprofit that can help bring everyone together.
  • Champion independent accountability. Vital to transparency with the public is an accountability mechanism. Ensuring your organization abides by independent oversight can ensure a consistent approach to determining compliance with established standards as well as appropriate self-regulatory enforcement for non-compliance that is not influenced by business or revenue goals.

 

Although advertising’s platforms, technology, and techniques have changed dramatically, the system of independent industry self-regulation has sustained, and thrived, proving itself as an adaptable model to evolving business environments. Today, that model of responsible businesses allowing themselves to be held publicly accountable by independent self-regulation is timelier than ever.

Originally published on Forbes.

 

 

 

Decisions

Decision

National Advertising Review Board Finds Certain AT&T Comparative Advertising Claims Supported; Recommends Discontinuation or Modification of Others

New York, NY – October 14, 2021 – The National Advertising Review Board (NARB) has determined that AT&T Services, Inc. properly supported certain comparative advertising claims for its fiber-optic internet service in one commercial and one internet video advertisement. However, it...

Read the Decision
Decision

National Advertising Review Board Recommends Colgate Discontinue “Removes 10 Years of Yellow Stains” Claim for Optic White Renewal Toothpaste

New York, NY – June 17, 2021 – A panel of the National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate advertising law body of BBB National Programs, has recommended that Colgate-Palmolive Company discontinue the claim that Optic White Renewal Toothpaste “removes 10 years of yellow stains” based...

Read the Decision
Decision

National Advertising Division Finds Certain Verizon 5G Claims Supported; Recommends Modification or Discontinuation of Others

New York, NY – October 19, 2021 – In the first National Advertising Division (NAD) Complex Track case, NAD determined that certain comparative performance claims for Verizon Wireless, Inc.’s 5G wireless service are supported or are non-actionable puffery. 
Read the Decision
Decision

ChromaDex, Inc. Discontinues Advertising Claims for Tru Niagen Dietary Supplement Following National Advertising Division Challenge

New York, NY – October 5, 2021 – Following a National Advertising Division (NAD) challenge, brought as part of NAD’s routine monitoring of national advertising for truth and transparency, the advertiser ChromaDex, Inc. permanently discontinued advertising claims regarding the performance benefits of its...

Read the Decision

 

 

 

Frequently Asked Questions

 

 

 

 

Contact Us

*Required fields