So I've spent $10 for a small cannister of placebo?
Airborne Brand Can Stay Healthy, Experts Say
Consumers likely to shrug off false advertising settlement
NEW YORK Consumers are likely to shrug off Airborne's false advertising-related settlement this week and the brand will remain healthy, marketing experts say.
The company, which markets herbal supplements, agreed to pay more than $23 million in a class-action settlement over false claims in an ad, but that's likely to be the extent of the damage, said Rob Frankel, a Los Angeles-based marketing consultant. "The stuff that generally kills a brand is endangerment, not ineffectiveness."
Frankel added that the fact the product does not appear to cure colds, as the packaging previously stated, "is going to be countered by all these people that dump on Western medicine."
Airborne, Pittsburgh, said its supplement was created by former second-grade teacher Victoria Knight-McDowell, who needed a remedy to fight germs and viruses. Since 1999, it has racked up hundreds of millions of dollars in sales.
In February 2006, a report surfaced on Good Morning America that exposed Airborne's clinical trial as a two-man operation without doctors or scientists. The same year, a class-action lawsuit was filed in California against the company when it was discovered that Airborne contains vitamins A, C and E, plus other nutrients found in most multivitamins, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, which is participating in the lawsuit.
Airborne has since changed its tactics, claiming instead that the supplement "boosts the immune system with seven herbal extracts and a proprietary blend of vitamins, electrolytes, amino acids and antioxidants." It also agreed to refund consumers, who bought Airborne under pretenses that it fights colds, and pay for ads notifying consumers about the litigation in Better Homes & Gardens, Parade, People, Newsweek and other publications.
Read the full article here. |
