The government wants to stop spirits businesses from using surrogate advertisements
NEW DELHI: The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has asked companies to make sure that there is no violation of the norms and has requested a list of products sold under the same brand as alcohol beverages (known as brand extensions) in the last three years after discovering multiple instances of spirits brands breaking surrogate advertising regulations.
Additionally, for the previous three years, it has requested income and turnover information pertaining to the sale of Alcobev as well as brand extension items (such as playing cards, music CDs, and mineral water). In addition, the CCPA requests all costs spent in the previous three years on brand extension promotion, including payments to influencers and celebrities, sponsorship of events, award shows, music festivals, and TV commercials.
The agency seeks to determine the relationship between the brand extension product’s real sales and the advertising budget. In the order released on Tuesday, CCPA Chief Commissioner Rohit Kumar Singh said, “This assessment is critical for determining whether the promotion of brand extension products authentically represents the extended product or functions as a surrogate for alcoholic beverages under the same brand.”
Days before the Indian Premier League begins, when these kinds of commercials are widely shown and promoted on social media, a letter to all Coca-Cola corporations and trade groups was sent out. Since it is illegal to market alcohol, businesses have resorted to employing surrogate ads to promote their goods.
“The two-page directive advises the industry to make sure that all brand extensions adhere to the general guidelines of only promoting legitimate extensions (i.e., turnover and distribution in proportion to advertising spends) and that advertisements don’t unduly suppress the category name and extension being advertised or contain any cues of restricted categories, such as tag lines and layouts.” Additionally, it said that consumer rights were at risk because of surrogate advertising.
