Listerine case study

Please replied to my classmates posts: for example give your opinion hi nice post ....

post 1 Chara wrote this;

Identify, compare and contrast the facts in Warner-Lambert and the case you identified

In the Warner-Lambert case the company claimed that its Listerine Anti-Septic Mouthwash was able to prevent and cure sore throats and colds. The company was unable to provide sufficient evidence or proof that the Listerine product provided more than fresh breathe even though they managed to falsely market the product as such.

A class action lawsuit was opened against Verizon Wireless in 2015. The Federal Communications Commission and the State Attorneys General and Verizon Wireless agreed to a refund program for current and former Verizon Wireless account holders due to unauthorized and previously unfunded commercial Premium Short Messaging Service charges that were created by third-parties. The charges appeared on account holders telephone bills through text message content such as sports and entertainment services. Even though Verizon Wireless stopped offering its commercial Premium SMS program in 2014, the class action lawsuit was enforced. Verizon Wireless customers, including myself received a credit adjustment on their February or March 2016 bill if they submitted a class action claim by December 31, 2015.

Both cases are similar in comparison because both companies deceived the consumer in order to make a profit by concealing or hiding the true facts about their product and services.

Is either company guilty of fraud?

Both companies are guilty of fraud according to the FTC, The FCC and the State Attorneys General because the law clearly states that when a company advertises a product or service, the advertisement must be truthful without misleading the consumer. By doing so, the consumer is provided with the opportunity to make an informed decision to purchase the product or service offered. When a company decides to hide the truth in its advertisement, it becomes both an unethical and illegal situation.

In the Warner-Lambert case, the company should have conducted studies that were backed by scientific evidence prior to marketing the product incorrectly.

Which factors, behavior or actions would you have done differently if you were in charge of the companies? Why?

In the Warner-Lambert case, I would have conducted surveys or focus groups with various aged people who were sick with colds and sore throats and paid them to use the Listerine product to determine if its use improved or cured them. I would add a disclaimer that stated, based on recent studies conducted the Listerine pocket packs product provided a vapor nasal action when two or three sheets were taken together to help with allergies however none of the products cure colds or sore throats.