Confectionary

The advertisement was television advertising for the advertiser’s product. It featured a woman on a phone leaving a voicemail for her sister. She was depicted to be in an Asian country; clearly coded as an emigrant away from home.

The script was: –

‘Hey, sis. I got your, I got your package. I just wanted to say thank you so much. But, um, don’t be spending your pocket money on me, all right? Just leave me a message.
Miss you.’

The woman opens the package to find a bar of a bar of Cadbury’s Dairy Milk chocolate which appeared to have been crudely resealed with a child’s sticker. She is amused by this.

A title card at the end read: –

‘There’s a glass & a half in everyone.’

This title card was accompanied by a voiceover which read this slogan and the familiar Dairy Milk logo of two glasses of milk pouring. Beneath the logo was a square of the chocolate.

Three complaints were received regarding the advertising. The three complainants considered the slogan ‘There’s a glass & a half in everyone’ together with the image of a glass and a half of milk pouring into a square of chocolate, to be misleading as they did not believe that there was that proportion of dairy content in the advertised product. Two of the complainants believed that milk in the product had been substantially substituted with palm oil.

The advertisers categorically refuted the allegations in the complaints and said that they believed that inaccurate information online regarding their products had prompted the complaints.

They said that their product did contain the equivalent of a glass and a half of fresh liquid milk in every format. This, they said, was not a new or unsubstantiated claim and had formed the cornerstone of the Cadbury Dairy Milk brand since 1928. They clarified that a glass and a half was 426ml of fresh liquid milk per every 227g of milk chocolate and that this information appeared on packaging for their product. They also said that the first listed ingredient on their product was milk meaning that this was most prominent ingredient.

The advertisers went on to say that the complained about tagline had a double meaning and was not strictly a claim regarding the composition of their product. They said that the tagline was meant also as an expression of the generosity and warmth inherent in every person, as embodied by the act of sharing their product.

The advertisers challenged the complaints that milk in their products had been replaced with palm oil.

They said that they have maintained the dairy content of their product despite a change of ownership of the brand, and the amount of vegetable oils was within legally required limits. They said that vegetable fats, including palm oil, had been used in their products for more than 40 years. They said this was not a new ingredient and that palm oil had never been used as a substitute for milk content.

Palm oil, they explained, was included in the product for the role it played in achieving a specific texture, consistency, and taste and that it served a distinct and different function from the dairy components in the product. They said they did not claim otherwise and that the products ingredients had remined the same for more than 40 years.

The advertisers went on to say that accordance with the Food Information Regulations 2014 (FIC), they had now specified the individual vegetable oils used in the composition of their products. They believed that this increased transparency on packing may have led some consumers to have erroneously inferred that palm oil was a new addition to their products or a substitution within their recipe. The advertisers said that this was not the case, and that improved labelling had reflected regulatory compliance, not any change to product formulation.

The advertisers submitted a photograph of a current label which showed Milk as the most prominent ingredient and the statement “The equivalent of 426ml of fresh liquid milk in every 227g of milk chocolate”

Complaints Not Upheld:

The Complaints Council considered the detail of the complaint and the advertisers response.

The Council noted the basis for complaints was made on the belief that the product did not contain ‘a glass and a half’ of milk. The Council noted the requirement of the Code that a marketing communication should not contain claims – whether direct or indirect, expressed or implied – which a consumer would be likely to regard as being objectively true unless the objective truth of the claims can be substantiated (S. 4.9).

The Council noted that the product continued to contain the equivalent of 426ml of fresh liquid milk in every 227g of milk chocolate. In the circumstances, they did not consider that the advertising was in breach of the Code on the basis suggested in the complaints.

Action Required:
No further action required.