Fine print on TV

[Alvis]

This is inspired by Derleth’s post on contract law - it reminded me of an old question plaguing me:

Many commercials on television show fine print. Mortgage and other finance-based companies, as well as car dealership ads, show a GREAT deal of it. Often, this text is crammed down as small as it possibly can be.

My question: is there any sort of legal limit to this sort of practice? Is there a limit to the size of the text being displayed?

I’ve seen text that takes up only a few horizontal lines of the picture. When paused (without interlacing), the text is completely unreadable. Other times, only by standing back a good deal from the TV can you start to get a feel for what the small, blurry text says.

There are hard limits to how small something onscreen can be in an NTSC system, so it would make sense to say, “charcters must occupy xx% of screen each” or have some other protection against just showing a fuzzy, gray box at the bottom of the screen instead of paragraphs of text.

[FatBaldGuy]

Not to mention that they only leave it on the screen long enough for you to read about three words.

[Tim_T-Bonham.net]

What you see in a TV commercial is not a binding, legal contract. So it doesn’t have to meet any requirements of contract law.

Heck, most of what you see in TV commercials is just plain false!

[Derleth]

@t-bonham@scc.net

What you see in a TV commercial is not a binding, legal contract. So it doesn’t have to meet any requirements of contract law.

Heck, most of what you see in TV commercials is just plain false!

We do have truth in advertising laws in this country, regardless of how they can be abused by clever shysters. In the real world, yes, ads do get pretty outrageous, but they need to at least dance around making an assertion that is outright untrue.

As it turns out, the FTC speaks directly to this issue in one of their online FAQs:

When the disclosure of qualifying information is necessary to prevent an ad from being deceptive, the information should be presented clearly and conspicuously so that consumers can actually notice and understand it. A fine-print disclosure at the bottom of a print ad, a disclaimer buried in a body of text unrelated to the claim being qualified, a brief video superscript in a television ad, or a disclaimer that is easily missed on a website are not likely to be effective. Nor can advertisers use fine print to contradict other statements in an ad or to clear up misimpressions that the ad would leave otherwise. For example, if an ad for a diet product claims “Lose 10 pounds in one week without dieting,” the fine-print statement “Diet and exercise required” is insufficient to remedy the deceptive claim in the ad. To ensure that disclosures are effective, advertisers should use clear and unambiguous language, place any qualifying information close to the claim being qualified, and avoid using small type or any distracting elements that could undercut the disclosure. Although there is no hard-and-fast rule about the size of type in a print ad or the length of time a disclosure must appear on TV, the FTC often has taken action when a disclaimer or disclosure is too small, flashes across the screen too quickly, is buried in other information, or is otherwise hard for consumers to understand. Most importantly, if you are concerned that a disclaimer or disclosure may be necessary to clarify a claim, evaluate your ad copy and substantiation carefully to ensure that you are not misleading consumers.

I believe my bolded section answers the question as best as it can be answered, without actually digging up the relevant case law.

[spingears]

The fine print is a caveat. Translates to be very very careful and understand what the papers you are signing obligate you to.
File a written complaint with the FCC.

[SavageNarce]

<Simpsons Canyonero ad>
Top of the line in utility sports, unexplained fires are a matter for the courts!
</Simpsons Canyonero ad>
:eek: