Apples to Oranges is Erroneous

On the way home yesterday, this blacklight challenge of an anti-dandruff shampoo went on-(radio)-air. (Inasmuchas I'd have loved to have a link of the commercial, I could not find it online.)

It went on saying how their brand has bested other products in the blacklight challenge and how great (blah blah blah) their stuff is. Then at the end, the VO goes something like this: "Results from testing C**** Anti-dandruff shampoo versus other non-antidandruff shampoo products."

(insert A-NYE-NYE! here.)

Okay... so if this were a TVC, that final VO would've been a fine print at the very, very, very bottom of the screen, right? But it was a radio commercial. The VO of the "fine print" was just as loud as the claims of the entire ad, and ergo made the whole thing erroneous.

People, this is why the masses think we're liars! We don't tell them the exact truth, we give a semblance of it and hope to God no one notices the fine print. But they do! Consumers are smart nowadays. If you're seriously claiming to be the best anti-dandruff shampoo in the market, then release the results with your direct competitor. Don't be saying, "Oh, these results are versus products of similar use, but not necessarily of same niché." Don't think you're market is dumb!

Lying to your market may have been the cool thing to do two or three years ago, but the masses have evolved and so should you. Be the storyteller now. If your brand failed the scientific blacklight study versus directly competing brands, then go for another angle. Say you're the best smelling, the long-lasting, the non-drying, WHATEVER! It doesn't make you less of an anti-dandruff shampoo.

Needless to say, I'm not buying that particular brand should I ever need to use an anti-dandruff shampoo. I'll go for their competitor, with the idea that it probably bested this brand in the C**** Blacklight Challenge.