Sophia & EoGB recommend a vote FOR Truth in Advertising

General Assembly: Truth in Advertising (Regulation; Consumer Protection), by New Kowloon Bay

Recommendation: FOR

Rationale: The goal of this proposal is so simple as to be stated in this title. What it actually does to ensure that companies only make truthful claims in their advertisements is a slightly more complicated matter: the resolution stipulates that they must - as a minimum - offer "supporting evidence" for claims that are not obviously true or for which the national authority requests confirmation of, explain the side effects of the product when used as intended, and disclose the relationship of any product endorsees to the company. It also creates a Fair Advertising Commission which must act to clamp down on false advertisements when the national authorities do not do enough to keep them in check.

All of these - except, perhaps, for the ever-looming overreach of the World Assembly that sections of the FAC's establishment clause provide for - are obviously sensible measures. There have nevertheless been claims that the rest of the proposal goes too far, claims which we find to be lacking. The nature of a truthful claim is clear enough as to not require explicit definition: member states will not want or need to check the truth of every single claim. ("Car X has power steering, antilock braking and lane adjustment systems" and "You can buy Widget Y at our store for fifty dollars" can be more easily verified and accepted than "Eating Food Z twice a week reduces your chance of Type 2 diabetes by between 27-40%.")

It has also been said that the burden of verification on small businesses will be relatively more immense than on large businesses, but this assumes that small businesses will regularly advertise, that they will regularly make risky or less-verifiable claims and that they cannot seek outside assistance to verify their claims - assumptions that broadly contradict real-world conditions. And the requirement to outline "potential side effects or risks" of the advertised product can be reasonably interpreted as applying only to the most serious risks and those that will affect the most consumers (at least for non-medical products), rather than every single risk imaginable.

All in all, this would be a good, if heavily-maligned, piece of legislation. Its impendent failure is surrounded by politics far more than the actual specifics of the law and we wish the author best of luck in their prospective efforts at redrafting this proposal.

~~~~~~~~~~

This recommendation was written by Tinhampton, the President of Sophia. The Empire of Great Britain concurs.

This resolution will be at vote between the major updates of September 5th 2023 and September 9th 2023.

This recommendation was jointly issued between Sophia and Empire of Great Britain. This does not mean that the President's opinion of this resolution was influenced by what Empire of Great Britain believes. Under the Constitution, the President must always cast their vote in line with the interests of Sophia, not some other region; this recommendation reflects the sincere beliefs of all regions involved.