A case for comparative advertising

Comparative and competitive advertising is, generally speaking, prohibited in South Africa, by laws on the use of trade marks, unlawful competition, and by the Advertising Standards Authority code. Even parody is, in itself, no defence. Yet some of the best, most clever, and most memorable advertising is often comparative.

The classic case in South Africa, from the early 1990s (if memory serves) is the response by BMW to an advertisement by Mercedes-Benz. The latter was shown on the famous Chapman’s Peak route along the Cape Town coast, whence it left the road and plunged down the cliff. The driver survived, attesting to the safety standards of Mercedes. BMW responded with an advert showing its car along the same route, negotiating it safely. The payoff line was, “Beats the bends”. It was pulled after only a short run, but after many years remains both a well-remembered advertisement and a well-known media catchphrase.

The impact of competitive advertising on price, in particular, would be substantially beneficial to consumers. I’m often mystified by price advertising, since I often don’t have a point of reference that determines whether a price is good or bad. At best, I have a vague idea about which shops are more or less expensive.

I’ll grant that if competitive or comparative advertising is permitted, recourse should be both swift and punitive should the advertiser make demonstrably false claims about their competitor.

All rational arguments aside, however, the sequence below — not new, but made after the 2006 Car of the Year award — makes as eloquent a case as any for competitive advertising.