Ethics Case

44.3 Ethics Case

Colgate-Palmolive Co. (Colgate) manufactured and sold a shaving cream called Rapid Shave. Colgate hired Ted Bates & Company (Bates), an advertising agency, to prepare television commercials designed to show that Rapid Shave could shave the toughest beards. With Colgate's consent, Bates prepared a television commercial that included the sandpaper test. The announcer informed the audience, "To prove Rapid Shave's super-moisturizing power, we put it right from the can onto this tough, dry sandpaper. And off in a stroke."

While the announcer was speaking, Rapid Shave was applied to a substance that appeared to be sandpaper, and immediately a razor was shown shaving the substance clean. Evidence showed that the substance resembling sandpaper was in fact a simulated prop, or "mock-up," made of Plexiglas to which sand had been glued. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a complaint against Colgate and Bates, alleging a violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Did the defendants act ethically in this case? Have the defendants engaged in false and deceptive advertising, in violation of Section 5 of the FT'C Act? Federal Trade Commission 'V. Colgate-Palmolive Company, 380 U.S. 374, 85 S. Ct. 1035, 1965 U.S. Lexis 2300 (Supreme Court of the United States)

Based on the above case 44.3

How do we know the commercial includes a sandpaper test. However, an actual test was done on a prop that resembles sandpaper. Please give more detailed information for me to understand. Thank you.