John Wyeth & Brother Ltd t/a SMA Nutrition Huntercombe Lane South Taplow Maidenhead Berkshire SL6 0PH Number of complaints: 109

Date: 19 December 2007 Media: Television Sector: Food and drink Agency: Publicis

Ad
A TV ad, for SMA Progress follow-on milk, showed a scene of a woman walking around her bedroom at night holding a baby, whilst a man was asleep in the bed.  A man's voice stated "I promise not to pretend I'm asleep when our baby wakes up at 3am or 4am or 5am.  I promise never to say 'My Mum thinks you're holding the baby wrong'.  I promise not to mention that sometimes when I kiss your beautiful neck it smells of perfume and baby sick.  I promise not to join in if my mates sing the theme tune from the Omen, although it is quite funny".  The ad showed a scene of a man falling asleep next to a boiling kettle and a tin of SMA Progress.  On-screen text stated "Progress is a follow-on formula.  Not intended to replace breastfeeding".  The man's voice continued "I promise to do at least my fair share of nappy changing and night feeding.  I promise to tell you often how proud I am of you and how you've made me the happiest dad on the planet.  All this I pledge without any pressure from you, my lovely, lovely missus".  A voice-over stated "Understanding parents, understanding babies.  For infant nutrition trust the experts.  SMA, we know."   The ad showed a tin and a packet of SMA Progress and on-screen text stated "We know".  

Issue
Viewers challenged whether the ad:

1. was misleading and harmful, because it did not make sufficiently clear that it was advertising follow-on formula milk for babies over six months old only; and

2. was misleading and harmful, because it did not make clear that breastfeeding was the preferred option and could discourage mothers from breastfeeding.

3. Two viewers also challenged whether the claim "For infant nutrition trust the experts" was misleading and whether it could be substantiated.  

BCAP TV Advertising Code:

5.1;6.7

Response
1. SMA Nutrition said the text "SMA Progress is a follow-on formula.  Not intended to replace breast milk" had appeared in the ad for five seconds and the SMA Progress logo or tin had been shown four times throughout the ad.   They said their agency always checked the age of babies who appeared in their ads to ensure that they were over six months old and had done so on this occasion.  They said the script had been carefully chosen to avoid giving the impression that the children were under six months and they believed a reasonable viewer would not make that inference. They said it was clear that the advertised product was their Progress follow-on formula because, for example, the ad did not refer to their infant formula products SMA Gold or SMA White and featured beakers, which were recommended for babies over six months.  They said the SMA Progress tin shown in the ad clearly stated that the product was suitable for babies aged 6 - 24 months.  They said they therefore believed the ad was not misleading or harmful in any way.

2. SMA said they accepted that breastfeeding was best for babies.  SMA said the on-screen text made clear that the product was not intended as a substitute for breastfeeding.  They said SMA Progress was designed to complement weaning, which was traditionally regarded as the next stage in nutritional development and started at the age of around six months. They pointed out that the Department of Health (DH) recommended exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months only and that weaning should not generally start before six months.

3. SMA said they had specialised in developing, manufacturing and selling infant nutrition products for over 90 years and were the leading manufacturer in the UK and the Republic of Ireland.  They said they invested in research and development into improving their formulae.  SMA Progress was the first follow-on formula to be launched in the UK and it had been specifically designed to complement weaning by containing added iron and vitamins to ensure babies aged six months and over got all the nutrients they needed during weaning.  They said that was one example of their long history of innovation in infant nutrition in the UK and ROI.  SMA said they also invested in informing and educating health care professionals, for example midwives, about infant nutrition through initiatives such as study days.  SMA said they were also regularly consulted by government bodies requiring input in that area of expertise.  For example, they said they had been consulted by the government on the formulation of the new EC Directive on Infant and Follow-on Formulae.  They said their customers already regarded them as experts and that was reflected in their regular tracking studies.

The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) said the product, and others like it, had been advertised for many years.  They said claims for the product were submitted to their nutritional consultant who confirmed they were acceptable.  They said the ad included the required on-screen text, which made clear that it was not intended to replace breast milk.  They believed the ad would not discourage mothers from breastfeeding and was unlikely to mislead.  They said SMA had confirmed that the ad complied with UK law and the relevant EU directive.   They said it was not the place of SMA to promote or denigrate breastfeeding and the ad did neither.

Assessment
1. Not upheld
The ASA noted the ad featured babies who were all over six months old and that the SMA Progress pack was shown several times in the ad.  We also noted the ad included on-screen text which made clear that it was advertising follow-on formula.

Although we noted there were some scenes or images in the ad which could be interpreted as references to babies under six months old, for example the night-feeding references, we considered that the ad as a whole, and particularly the on-screen text and the pack shots, made sufficiently clear that the ad promoted a follow-on formula for babies over six months only.  We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead or cause harm.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising) and 6.7 (Health and Safety) but did not find it in breach.

2. Not upheld
We noted the ad included the on-screen text "Progress is a follow-on formula.  Not intended to replace breastfeeding" and we considered that made clear that the product was not intended as a substitute for breastfeeding.  We noted the ad did not denigrate breastfeeding or suggest that bottle-feeding was preferable.  We considered that, given the context of the whole ad, viewers were unlikely to infer that breastfeeding was not the preferred option nor be discouraged from breastfeeding.  We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead or to cause harm.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising) and 6.7 (Health and Safety) but did not find it in breach.

3. Not upheld
We noted SMA had been developing their infant formulae for over 90 years and had invested in research and informing health care professionals.  We also noted they were involved in government consultations on the issues surrounding infant nutrition.  We noted the voice-over stated "for infant nutrition trust the experts - we know" and we considered that most viewers were likely to interpret the claim as an expression of SMAs opinion about their knowledge of infant nutrition.  We considered that, because SMA had been established for over 90 years and were actively involved in the formula-milk industry and because viewers were likely to understand the claim as SMAs opinion in that context, it was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising) and 5.2.1 (Evidence) but did not find it in breach.   

Action
No further action required.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)