ASA upholds complaints against Lipton’s green packaging claims

How careful do you need to be when promoting the environmentally friendly nature of product packaging?

The key takeaway

The ASA continues to take a very hard line when it comes to greenwashing. If you make an absolute claim, you must be able to substantiate it. Remember also that qualifications must clarify rather than contradict a headline claim. 

The background

A poster for Lipton Ice Tea, as seen on a bus shelter in August 2021, featured headline text which stated “DELICIOUSLY REFRESHING, 100% RECYCLED*”. An asterisk linked to small text at the bottom of the poster stated: “Bottle made from recycled plastic, excludes cap and label”. The ad included pack shots of two Lipton Ice Tea bottles, with a recycling logo and the text “I’M 100% RECYCLED PLASTIC” visible.

The development

Pepsi Lipton International said the headline claim “100% RECYCLED*” had a clear asterisk that indicated to consumers there was a qualification that should be read in conjunction with it. They accepted that the size of the text in the qualification was small and could have been overlooked. However, in their opinion, the wording of the qualification “Bottle made from recycled plastic, excludes cap and label” was sufficient to clarify that the claim related to the bottle only and excluded the cap and label.

They said the general understanding of consumers was that bottle caps and labels were not generally made of recycled materials. However, because some consumers might have assumed the headline claim related to the entire product shown in the ad, they considered it was appropriate to clarify the claim with the qualification.

The complaint was upheld. The ASA considered consumers would understand the claim “100% RECYCLED*” alongside images of the bottle with the label and cap to mean that all components of the Lipton Iced Tea bottle (ie the bottle, cap and label) were made entirely from recycled materials. The ASA acknowledged the ad stated, “Bottle made from recycled plastic, excludes cap and label”.

However, they considered that the wording appeared in very small text in the left-hand bottom corner of the ad, and therefore it could be overlooked. Notwithstanding this, the ASA considered that even if some consumers had seen the qualification, because the cap and label were not made from recycled materials, and the overall impression they created was that all parts of the bottle were made entirely from recycled materials, the qualification was insufficient to counter that impression. Because the overall impression of the ad was that all components of the bottle were made entirely from recycled materials when that was not the case, the ASA concluded that the claim “100% RECYCLED*” was misleading. The ad therefore breached rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification) and 11.3 (Environmental claims) of the CAP Code.

The ASA ruled that the ad must not appear again in the form complained about. It told Pepsi Lipton International to ensure their advertising did not state or imply that their product packaging was made from 100% recycled material where it contained components that did not meet the criteria. The ASA also told them to ensure that qualifications did not counter the overall impression made by the ad.

Why is this important?

This adjudication (one of several similar adjudications in recent months) is a strong indicator of the ASA’s zero tolerance approach with regards to environmental claims. At a time where brands are focussing more and more on the sustainable nature of their businesses as a means of engaging with an increasingly environmentally conscious consumer base, brands will need to very careful when making absolute “green” claims. The ASA has further noted that any absolute claim with regards to a product or a business practice must take into account the full life cycle of the product including the sourcing of ingredients, transport, packaging and so on. 

The ruling also serves as a useful reminder that qualifications to claims must not contradict the headline claim and, when it comes to green claims, the ASA is highly unlikely to side with a brand if there is a hint of any misleading elements. 

Any practical tips?

Bullish environmental claims are extremely attractive to marketing departments trying to make their brands more appealing to a modern audience. Any absolute claim must be treated with extreme caution and robustly analysed, remembering that any green claim must be assessed through the lens of the full lifecycle of the product.