The pitfalls of comparative advertising: what you need to know

Comparative advertising is an area full of legal pitfalls: legal pitfalls in legal minefields. Surrounded by a thick and unforgiving legal quagmire.

And it isn't just the law that complicates matters. Customers typically dislike this sort of spiel:

Aren't ‘Brand [X]’ rubbish? We mean: really quite lavishly rubbish. Our widgets are so much better…

Mentioning competitors also means that a business might be giving aid and succour to the 'enemy'. They may as well say 'Brand [X] does exists and we're really quite worried about them.'

Indeed, if your client inadvertently starts a war with their competitors, tit-for-tat bickering between them can quickly start to damage both brands and product categories. Customers may start to think: 'I’m not going to bother with either of you. A plague on both your houses!'

In brief, a badly executed comparative advertising campaign can backfire spectacularly. Is it any wonder that advertisers see this form of advertising as somewhat taboo?

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying 'don't bother'. Sometimes the battle comes to your client. Last week, for example, Morrisons supermarkets announced a price match guarantee scheme to fight discount supermarkets such as Lidl and Aldi, the market share of which has been increasing in recent years. On the other hand, Morrisons recently reported a fall in half-year profits of more than 30%:

https://twitter.com/BBCBusiness/status/517739195344109568

Lidl, who stand to lose business with this development, responded with this ad (which was very well received on social media):

https://twitter.com/stevemyalleats/status/518327311486439424

Whether it works in practice only time will tell.

So what do you need to know if your client wants, or indeed needs, to launch a c