Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Microban 24: Kills Viruses and Bacteria for 24 Hours?

Everyone is very conscious these days of keeping surfaces that we touch as sanitary as possible. So what a perfect time to promote this product, Microban 24, that kills viruses and bacteria.

What is the impression you come away with after watching that commercial? They claim that Microban 24 kills 99.9% of viruses and bacteria, and you may believe they said it works for 24 hours. Watch the commercial again.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Microban fine print

They actually claim, combining their oral statements and fine print disclaimer that Microban 24 kills bacteria for 24 hours, but only kills viruses initially (upon spraying) and NOT for 24 hours. The company cleverly omits the word “viruses” when making its 24-hour claim.

So despite the product’s name, and a very carefully worded commercial where every word is literally true, a consumer could very easily come away with an incorrect impression of the efficacy of the product. And under FTC theory of the law, this could make the ad deceptive.

It is the net impression conveyed by a solicitation, “not its literal truth or falsity,” that determines whether it is deceptive. FTC v. Cyberspace.com, LLC, 453 F.3d 1196, 1200, 1201 (9 Cir. 2000).

We asked Procter & Gamble, the maker of the product, why they don’t clearly state orally that virus protection does not last 24 hours, and whether they would consider modifying their advertisements to more clearly disclose the limited nature of the virus protection. P&G did not respond to our inquiry.

UPDATE October 28: The EPA just granted approval to add Microban 24 to its list of products that can kill the coronavirus within 60 seconds. But, that does not change the fact that P&G’s product does not continue to kill viruses for 24 hours contrary to the impression created by their advertising.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Walgreens Shortchanges Customers on Some Coupons

MrConsumer became a victim of a sneaky practice by Walgreens a few weeks ago. He spotted a great deal on Crest 3D White toothpaste, and even promoted it to readers as a “Bargain of the Week” in Consumer World.

Walgreens Crest offer

In this offer, if you bought four tubes of Crest, one of them would be free, plus there was an additional $1 electronic coupon and also an $8 one. Conceivably you could snare all four tubes for only $1.77. It was unclear if one of these coupons was a store coupon and one a manufacturers coupon, so I e-clipped both. I thought if the $1 coupon could not be used in combination with the $8 coupon, obviously I would just use the $8 one.

At the store, the cashier scanned my loyalty card and the four tubes. The total on the screen said $9.77 (before tax) rather than the $1.77 or $2.77 that I expected. This happened because it only took off the $1 coupon. I told her something was wrong because I had also e-clipped an $8 coupon. What she said next floored me.

*MOUSE PRINT:

“The system only takes off the LOWEST value coupon.”

Say what? She said that she could not manually remove the $1 coupon, that I would have to do it in my e-wallet, and then the system would accept the $8 one. I showed the cashier that I didn’t see any apparent way to remove a coupon at the Walgreens website on my cellphone. She said that can only be done in the Walgreens app, which I did not have.

So I left the four tubes at the checkout and headed home to install the Walgreens app and try to remove the $1 coupon. That part of this saga was successful, so I drove back to the store. A different cashier found my four tubes of Crest behind the counter and rang up the order. This time the system took off the $8 coupon properly, which I pointed out to the cashier. She too reiterated that Walgreens’ checkouts only deduct the lowest value coupon applicable to the order.

I couldn’t believe that any company would deliberately create a system to deny customers the use of a legitimate high-value coupon that was properly clipped particularly since the company was getting reimbursed in full for it by the manufacturer.

So we asked Walgreens why they had such an anti-consumer policy. A PR spokesperson for the company replied:

“Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Our current POS [point-of-sale] system is not able to logically determine the best offer at the customer transaction level. Our system applies digital coupons based on the order that the customer activated them along with corresponding expiration dates. We are working with our CPG partners as well as our digital coupon provider to develop remedies outside of our POS. In addition, we are developing a capability for our team members at POS to be able to add and remove coupons at the time of checkout on behalf of the customer. We will follow-up with you as we have more information to share.”

A number of shoppers have posted complaints online including saying that the Walgreens policy noted just above was changed toward the end of 2019 to a lowest value first one.

While we are pleased to have prompted Walgreens to work on a variety of solutions, this never should have happened. A simple highest value first policy would benefit shoppers the most, just like the one used by supermarket chain Hy-Vee:

*MOUSE PRINT:

“If more than one digital coupon is loaded for the same product, the best value will be redeemed at checkout.”

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Is It a News Story or a Sales Pitch on Major News Sites?

We turn to news sites like CNBC, USA Today, CNN and many others for news stories written by seasoned reporters independent of the advertising sales side of these businesses. So, we can generally expect the stories we see on those sites not to be advertising in disguise, or somehow tempered by the writer’s knowledge that the subject of the story advertises on that site, right?

More and more, however, big name news sites are blurring the line between conventional news stories written by the site’s journalists, and what is called “commerce content.” The whole purpose of commerce content is to publish what look like news or feature stories but whose purpose is really to sell stuff to readers thereby allowing the site to earn a commission. All this is done under the aura of the well-known and trusted name of the news site on which these articles appear.

Here is an advertisement for CNN Underscored which reviews various products:



If you go to CNN Underscored directly, or from a search result, you will find a long list of stories such as ones about buying the best laptop, or finding the best cash back credit card.

CNN Underscored story

At the top of the site, however, there is a fine print disclaimer:

*MOUSE PRINT:

CNN Underscored is your guide to the everyday products and services that help you live a smarter, simpler and more fulfilling life. The content is created by CNN Underscored. CNN News staff is not involved. When you make a purchase, we receive revenue. [color added for emphasis]

That’s right. CNN (and the other sites mentioned below) typically use other writers and reporters to write these stories to help lead you to make a purchase and thus compensate the website’s publisher.

Interestingly, in its “About Us” section, CNN says that the Underscored staff doesn’t always test the products themselves but rather reads others’ reviews or other organizations’ test results as part of its research process.

Below is a Who’s Who of news media with either whole sections devoted to these sales pitches dressed up to look like regular consumer stories, or who intermingle commerce content or sponsored stories with legitimate news stories. Some do a better job than others in researching the subject matter of the story and thus provide a valuable service. Most of them do a relatively poor job in disclosing that they make money if you make a purchase from the links in their articles.

  • CNBC Select
  • USA Today Reviewed
  • New York Times Wirecutter
  • Forbes shopping
  • Yahoo! Life [certain stories]
  • Huffington Post Shopping Finds
  • Business Insider
  • BuzzFeed Shopping
  • Washington Post Brand Studio [sponsored content]
  • NBC News Brand Studio [sponsored content]
  • NBC News Shop Today
  • Tribune Publishing/BestReviews (Chicago Tribune, NY Daily News, Baltimore Sun, etc.)
  • MSN Travel/Points Guy

    So many news sites are now promoting links from which they can get paid that the Wall Street Journal has put a disclaimer at the end of some of its stories saying that it is NOT receiving any such compensation:

    *MOUSE PRINT:

    WSJ not being paid

    The trouble with these types of stories on many of the news websites is that they often are listed in Google News or Bing News when doing searches of news stories. So you have to look carefully at ANY news story to see if it is a regular news feature or a story designed to get you to buy a product or service.