Chapter 20 – Regulation of Advertising and Promotion
20–23
15. IMC Perspective 20-2 discusses the legal battle between Pizza Hut and Papa John’s over the latter’s
use of the tagline “Better Ingredients. Better Pizza.” Which company do you side with in this
controversy and why? (L03)
The battle between Pizza Hut and Papa John’s involved whether the latter’s use of this tag line in a
comparative context could be considered puffery. Puffery has been defined as “advertising or other
sales presentations which praise the item to be sold with subjective opinions, superlatives, or
exaggerations, vaguely and generally, stating no specific facts.” Defenders of puffery argue that it
represents a form of “poetic license” or allowable exaggeration and does no harm as consumers can
recognize it and do not really believe the claims. However, critics of puffery argue that consumers
cannot distinguish between puffery and verifiable, fact-based claims.
You might ask your students whether they think advertisers should be permitted to make claims that
they cannot substantiate and defend them as puffery. Critics of puffery argue that its use burdens
16. What is corrective advertising? Why do you think corrective advertising is so controversial? Evaluate
the arguments for and against corrective advertising? (L03)
Corrective advertising is a Federal Trade Commission program whereby and advertiser found guilty
of deceptive advertising can be required to run additional ads designed to remedy the deception
resulting from consumer exposure to the previous ads. The purpose of corrective advertising is to
remedy the misinformation, incorrect beliefs or perceptions that consumers may have developed as a