Is white chocolate better than, or not as good as, dark chocolate? Can you prove it? No to the last question, of course, because tastes reside in each individual’s mind. De gustibus non est disputandum. Now, does Bud Light beer taste like water?
An economist worth his salt must be surprised to read in the Wall Street Journal (“Molson Coors Told to Stop Saying Rivals’ Beer Tastes Like Water,” February 23, 2022) that an advertisement suggesting Bud Light tastes like water is misleading because not supported by evidence, as if matters of taste could be and consumers were idiots:
BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division, an ad-industry self-regulatory group, determined that Molson Coors Beverage Co. should stop marketing its light beer products by implying that those produced by rivals have little or no flavor. … “Consumers may also reasonably expect that the statement is supported by such evidence.”
(A little personal anecdote may illustrate how deeply the taste of beer is subjective. When my sons were kids, they administered a blind beer-tasting session for me, or on me. It ominously revealed that I preferred the beer of which I had previously claimed it tasted like pee. That beer was precisely, if my memory serves, the Bud Light. I now basically only drink Stella Artois, but my reader doesn’t have to share my tastes.)
There is another way to look at the decision of the National Advertising Division: the NAD is a private standard organization in which no advertiser is forced to participate, but whose voluntary participants presumably believe that it participation contributes to the credibility to their ads. Any producer remains free to not to participate and any consumer is at liberty to buy beer produced by non-participants. So there would be nothing to object to (nihil obstat, as we would say in Latin).
But it is a testimony to our authoritarian times that the clout of this so-called private organization comes, at least partly, from its on-going threat to call upon its big brother to enforce its decisions. The website of NAD makes this clear (although not very easy to find):
If the advertiser agrees to comply with any recommended changes to their advertising, the case is closed. If the advertiser does not agree to comply, it is referred to the FTC and other appropriate regulatory agencies.
If the vice-president of the NAD is correctly paraphrased by the Wall Street Journal, she made the threat against the producer of the non-water-tasting beer more explicit:
Those that don’t comply with [NAD’s] findings are referred to the Federal Trade Commission, which will often review business practices beyond the ads in question, she said.
Is it the regulator who has captured the regulated, or the other way around? (On the theory of “regulatory capture,” see Mark J. Perry, “Nobel Economist George Stigler on ‘Capture Theory’ and the Inevitability of Businesses Seeking Regulation (and Tariffs), American Enterprise Institute, April 23, 2018; and Betty Joyce Nash, “Regulatory Capture,” Richmond Fed, 2010.)
READER COMMENTS
nobody.really
Feb 26 2023 at 5:22pm
Three thoughts:
1:
I suspect this web page attracts some share of Objectivists (Ayn Rand fans), who inexplicably emphasize that “A = A.” These people, among others, would argue that you CAN prove that white chocolate is no better than white chocolate.
2:
Ooooooo – Doubtless Molsen’s is shaking in their boots. ‘Cuz it’s not as if just ANYONE could file a complaint with the FTC, right?
Wrong.
3: Regarding beer, here’s the relevant standard:
Monty Python Live at the Hollywood Bowl (1982).
Pierre Lemieux
Feb 26 2023 at 8:12pm
Nobody: Randians are a bit special. On your point #2, I suppose that indeed anybody can complain to the FTC. But I suspect that a complaint by a capturing regulated has more weight.
Jon Murphy
Feb 27 2023 at 10:41am
Regarding your point #2, I don’t think it changes Pierre’s point much. The relationship seems like a Little Sister/Big Daddy one. Refusal to do what the Little Sister NAD wants results in them tattling to Big Daddy FTC. To Pierre’s point, the NAD acts like an undeputized deputy of the FTC. It saves them enforcement costs by outsourcing the work.
We saw something similar during the pandemic. Neighbors and stores were encouraged (or, in the case of New York State, required) to report violations and bad behavior to the relevent agencies. In some cases (like NYS’s mask mandate in 2022), stores were required to enforce the rules themselves, too. They weaponized tattling in order to save themselves from actually enforcing their rules.
nobody.really
Feb 27 2023 at 1:39pm
Regarding your point #2, I don’t think it changes Pierre’s point much. The relationship seems like a Little Sister/Big Daddy one. Refusal to do what the Little Sister NAD wants results in them tattling to Big Daddy FTC. To Pierre’s point, the NAD acts like an undeputized deputy of the FTC. It saves them enforcement costs by outsourcing the work.
And the problem with that is …?
There are lots of public interest groups (say, the ACLU) that evaluate people’s grievances, seek redress, and file suit when redress is not forthcoming. No court has a duty to accept the ACLU’s view on anything. You might grumble that the ACLU has been “captured” – or the NRA, or the Roman Catholic Church. But so what? They’re private organizations; they’re entitled to their own opinions—and entitled to act on those opinions. It’s called “petitioning government for the redress of grievance,” and has a distinguished history in the US.
Now, I grant you, there can be tricky situations involving extortion. In Japan, if your firm doesn’t pay off the Yakuza organized crime syndicate, they’ll … organize a petition drive compelling your firm to pursue a lengthy/expensive environmental impact analysis—BWA HA HA! Ok, I don’t think this fiendishness will feature prominently in the next James Bond thriller, but at least this fact pattern might justify the kind of alarm Lemieux is raising.
The beer thing? Not so much.
We saw something similar during the pandemic. Neighbors and stores were encouraged (or, in the case of New York State, required) to report violations and bad behavior to the relevant agencies.
This goes a little far afield, but I have never wrapped my brain around compulsory reporting. Sure, I like it when private childcare providers report evidence that someone in their custody is being subject to regular abuse—but under what authority could government compel such reporting?
And if government finds a sufficiently compelling reason to make reporting mandatory, does it make sense to conclude that RELIGIOUS figures (e.g., priests in confession) are exempt from such requirements?
Topics for a different post….
Jon Murphy
Feb 27 2023 at 1:53pm
Regulatory capture, as the post discusses. Not to mention vigilantism.
nobody.really
Feb 27 2023 at 1:44pm
And the problem with that is …?
There are lots of public interest groups (say, the ACLU) that evaluate people’s grievances, seek redress, and file suit when redress is not forthcoming. No court has a duty to accept the ACLU’s view on anything. You might grumble that the ACLU has been “captured” – or the NRA or the Roman Catholic Church. But so what? They’re private organizations; they’re entitled to their own opinions—and entitled to act on those opinions. It’s called “petitioning government for the redress of grievance,” and has a distinguished history in the US.
Now, I grant you, there can be tricky situations involving extortion. In Japan, if your firm doesn’t pay off the Yakuza organized crime syndicate, they’ll … organize a petition drive compelling your firm to pursue a lengthy/expensive environmental impact analysis—BWA HA HA! Ok, I don’t think this fiendishness will feature prominently in the next James Bond thriller, but at least this fact pattern might justify the kind of alarm Lemieux is raising.
The beer thing? Not so much.
This goes a little far afield, but I have never wrapped my brain around compulsory reporting. Sure, I like it when private childcare providers report evidence that someone in their custody is being subject to regular abuse—but under what authority could government compel such reporting?
And if government finds a sufficiently compelling reason to make reporting mandatory, does it make sense to conclude that RELIGIOUS figures (e.g., priests in confession) are exempt from such requirements?
Maybe topics for a different post….
Pierre Lemieux
Feb 27 2023 at 2:58pm
Nobody: I had missed the meaning of your first point. Where you delicately trying to point out a typo in my first sentence? If so, thanks! I did independently saw it later and corrected it. There is no more “A is A!”
Craig
Feb 27 2023 at 8:50am
BBB is in many ways an extortion racket. Oh and by the way BBB complaints mostly are competitor defamation now. What happens of course is that they want to sell you an accreditation for hundreds of dollars. Why do I want this? I don’t. But then you’ll somehow notice online doing a google search that BBB has given you an F rating for not complying and of course when one sees that one tends to contact the BBB and then they tell you that to get rid of the F rating you need to pay the accreditation fee. So I threatened to sue them for defamation because I told them I wasn’t interested in participating. My business is now currently rated ‘NR’ which is ‘not rated’ which is fine, I don’t care.
Pierre Lemieux
Feb 27 2023 at 2:55pm
Craig: That would be a third way to look at the decision of the National Advertising Division. It would still suggest a symbiosis between Small Brother and Big Brother.
nobody.really
Feb 28 2023 at 11:33am
Nonsense: NR means nobody.really. And I give your business two thumbs up.
(Then again, you may not want to advertise this fact. “Nobody.really likes my business!” isn’t the best marketing slogan….)
Pierre Simard
Feb 27 2023 at 5:18pm
Le marché de la bière n’est pas qu’une question de goût. La concurrence des microbrasseries se fait désormais sur le mauvais goûts, notamment sur les noms qu’ils se plaisent à donner à leur bière. Par exemple, la micro Corsaire de Lévis vend la Tite-Pute qu’elle décrit comme une blonde facile et la vicieuse qui produirait une orgie dans la bouche.
On est loin de l’époque politique où la Molson Canadian était la bière la plus vendue au Canada et … non disponible au Québec.