ASCI flags surge in misleading summer ad claims; over 97% of ads found non-compliant

The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) has found widespread non-compliance in advertisements promoting summer-centric products, with brands across personal care, home appliances and consumer goods making claims that could not be adequately substantiated.

According to ASCI's latest review of summer advertising campaigns between April and June 2026, the self-regulatory body examined 40 advertisements featuring products and services marketed specifically for the summer season. Of these, 39 advertisements were either voluntarily modified or withdrawn by advertisers or found to be in violation of the ASCI Code, leaving only one advertisement that successfully defended its claims with robust scientific evidence.

The findings underscore growing concerns around brands increasingly positioning everyday consumer products as solutions for health, wellness and appearance-related concerns without adequate scientific backing.

Of the 40 advertisements reviewed, 21 were modified or withdrawn by advertisers without contest after ASCI raised concerns, while another 18 were held to be in violation by the Consumer Complaints Council (CCC). Only a single advertisement was found to be compliant, highlighting the scale of unsupported advertising claims across categories.

ASCI said the advertisements came to its attention through a combination of consumer complaints and proactive monitoring during the peak summer months, when categories such as beverages, air conditioners, sunscreens, travel and wearables typically witness a spike in promotional activity.

The review found that personal care products and environmental comfort solutions accounted for the largest share of problematic advertising.

Sun protection products and tan-removal solutions emerged as the biggest category under scrutiny, followed by home appliances and furnishings marketed around cooling, air purification and indoor comfort.

One of the most concerning trends identified by ASCI was the promotion of skin-lightening and tan-removal products specifically targeted at babies and children. The regulator reviewed 14 such advertisements, noting that they sought to exploit parental anxieties about tanning while reinforcing harmful beauty stereotypes even for infants and young children.

ASCI also observed an evolution in how brands are marketing sun protection. Beyond conventional sunscreens, companies are increasingly promoting apparel such as sunscreen jackets claiming "UPF 150+" protection and cooling garments marketed using proprietary technologies such as "Ice Cool Tech."

However, the watchdog found that advertisers were unable to adequately substantiate the technological capabilities being claimed for many of these products.

Similarly, beauty brands continued to promise dramatic and near-instant cosmetic transformations within minutes or days. Claims such as "De-tan & Glow in 30 Seconds", "Visible difference in 5 Days", and "Remove stubborn tan in 2 minutes" were among those that had to be modified or withdrawn due to the absence of appropriate scientific evidence supporting such outcomes.

Another notable trend identified by ASCI was the changing positioning of air conditioners.

Rather than limiting communication to cooling performance or energy efficiency, manufacturers increasingly marketed air conditioners as health and wellness solutions capable of tackling air pollution, allergens and disease-causing germs.

Several advertisements made sweeping claims such as removing "up to 99.97% of air pollutants including Covid-19, bacteria and pollen." ASCI found that many of these advertisements overstated product capabilities by extrapolating limited or context-specific testing into broad consumer-facing claims.

Among all the advertisements reviewed, only one escaped regulatory action after successfully substantiating its extended odour protection claim.

The advertiser supported its claims through clinical studies measuring efficacy over 72 and 96 hours, statistical evidence demonstrating significant odour reduction compared with untreated areas, and scientific documentation validating the active ingredients used in the product formulation.

ASCI said the case illustrated that strong marketing claims can be sustained when backed by rigorous, product-specific scientific evidence.

The review also identified several recurring weaknesses in advertising practices across industries.

Among the most common issues were the absence of substantiation before advertisements were released, advertisers failing to engage with ASCI's requests during investigations, weak evidence supporting technical and market leadership claims, and inadequate due diligence by influencers and celebrity endorsers promoting products.

ASCI said these findings mirror trends identified in its Annual Complaints Report 2025-26, suggesting that companies are increasingly prioritising speed to market over claim verification.

The watchdog cautioned that while brands continue to innovate by positioning products around health, protection, wellness and appearance, persuasive marketing cannot outpace scientific substantiation. It added that evidence is no longer merely a compliance requirement but the foundation of consumer trust and long-term brand credibility.