A parliamentary committee on food, consumer affairs and public distribution has suggested changes in the Consumer Protection Bill which could mean a jail term of five years and a fine of ₹50 lakh for celebrities who endorse a product making unrealistic claims. During the height of the Maggi noodles imbroglio, actors Madhuri Dixit, Amitabh Bachchan and Preity Zinta were dragged to court through a PIL for promoting the instant noodles brand. Since then there has been a raging debate on whether celebrity ambassadors should be booked for participating in an advertisement with false or misleading claims. After all, they are but messengers, and the primary responsibility lies with manufacturers and marketers. Public sympathy in that instance was very strongly in favour of Madhuri Dixit, with the feeling that she was unwittingly caught in a soup. However, in the case of cricketer MS Dhoni, who promoted a housing project by the Amrapali group that did not deliver amenities promised in its ads, residents have been unforgiving and trolled him over social media.
Clearly, going by the recommendations of the committee, the Centre is inclined to come down heavily on celebrity endorsers. On paper at least, it sounds like a good move that protects the interests of consumers. After all, several pieces of marketing research have proved that people — especially the young — get swayed when their favourite faces push a brand. A study in Britain, for instance, found that 30 per cent of respondents bought a product due to celebrity endorsement and that 41.2 per cent were in the 18-24 age group. An older study in India by MEC Global showed that 30 per cent of respondents in the 18-34 age group were willing to try a product promoted by their idols. With fame comes responsibility and celebrities need to understand this. The move will also make our advertisers think beyond formulaic celebrity endorsement ads. While celebrity endorsements are attention grabbing, the economic value they deliver are questionable and a lazy form of advertising.
That said, the quantum of punishment proposed to be levied on brand ambassadors appears unwarranted. A public rebuke and a reasonably deterrent fine should be ample. Stringent action, however, needs to be taken against the manufacturer/service provider, as well as the marketer or ad agency that has created the communication with these claims. The developments also highlight the need for more effective regulatory oversight of advertising. The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), a self-regulatory body, currently sets standards and provides regulatory oversight. But it is an industry body with no representation of consumers, and its track record is spotty. This January, in fact, ASCI had promised to look into celebrity endorsements of paan masala after the Delhi government wrote to stars like Ajay Devgan and Shah Rukh Khan asking them not to endorse such products.