Itt Continental Baking Co., Inc., and Ted Bates and Co., Inc.

Page 25

Title 16— Commercial Practices CHAPTER I— FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [Docket 8860-O] PART 13— PROHIBITED TRADE PRACTICES ITT Continental Baking Co., Inc., and Ted Bates and Co., Inc.

Subpart—Advertising falsely or mis- N-dingly: § 13.10 Advertising falsely or misleadingly; § 13.20 Comparative data or merits;

§ 13.45 Content; § 13.170 [Qualifies or properties of product or service; 13.170-52 Medicinal, therapeu­ tic, healthful, etc; 13.170-64 Nutritive 113.190 Results; § 13.205 Scientific or pther relevant facts; § 13.285 Value. pubpart—Misrepresenting oneself and poods—Goods:

§ 13.1575 Comparative P ia merits; § 13.1710 Qualities or properties; § 13.1740 Scientific or other Newmt facts; § 13.1775 Value. Sub- |parV-Offering unfair, improper and de­ ceptive, inducements to purchase or deal: p 13.2063 Scientific or other relevant focis. Subpart—Using deceptive tech- Piques in advertising: § 13.2275 Using receptive techniques in advertising. KSec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interprets 860• 68 Stat. 719, as amended; 15 45, 52 [Cease and desist order, ITT L n~ Tentai Baking Company, Inc., et al., [1973]) York* Docket 8860, October 19, In the matter of ITT Continental Baking Company, Inc., a corporation and Ted Bates & Company, Inc., a cor­ poration.

Order requiring a Rye, New York, manufacturer, seller, and distributor of bakery products, “Wonder Bread” and “Hostess” snack cakes, and its advertis­ ing agency, among other things to cease misrepresenting the nutritional content, efficacy or functional value of its products.

The- order to cease and desist, includ­ ing further order requiring report of compliance therewith, is a follows: It is ordered, That the following Find­ ings of Fact of the Administrative Law Judge are adopted as Findings of Fact of the Commission:

Findings 1-5, 7, 13-16, 18-21, 23—27; the first two sentences of Finding 28; Findings 36-37; the first sentence of Finding 46; Findings 47-50, 52; the first sentence of Finding 53; the first sentence of Finding 64; Finding 65; the first sen­ tence of Finding 97; Findings 98-100; the first two sentences of Finding 101; Find­ ing 109; the first sentence of Finding 111; the first two sentences of Finding 112; Findings 114, 128, 163-169, 224, and 226. It is further ordered, That the follow­ ing cease and desist order be, and it here­ by is, entered:

I. It is ordered, That respondent ITT Continental Baking Company, Inc., a cor­ poration, and respondent Ted Bates and Company, Inc., a corporation, their suc­ cessors and assigns and respondents’ offi­ cers, agents, representatives and em­ ployees, directly or through any corpora­ tion, subsidiary, division or other device, in connection with the advertising, offer­ ing for sale, sale or distribution of any food product, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Dissemination, or causing the dis­ semination of, any advertisement by means of the United States mails or by any means in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commis­ sion Act, which represents, directly or by implication.

a. The nutritional properties of any such product in generalized terms such as “rich in nutrients,” vitamins or iron forti­ fied, “enriched,” or other similar nutri­ tional references, without identifying the basis relied upon for the nutritional claims, and unless the advertised nutri­ tional value can be substantiated for the average and ordinary use of the product by consumers or by particular groups of consumers provided they are specified. b. The comparative nutritional efficacy or value of the product without stating the brand, product or product category to which the comparison is being made. c. The essentiality of the product as a source of a particular nutritional value if there are other food product categories which are also sources of the same or similar nutritional values, and unless the claim can be substantiated for the nor­ mal use of the product by consumers or by a particular group of consumers pro­ vided that they are specified. d.

The functional value or other at­ tributes of any such product to a user through the use of demonstrations or other visual techniques unless the dem­ onstrations are actual depictions of the actual value of the product by actual persons and represent the average and ordinary experience of consumers with the use of the product.

2. Disseminating, or causing the dis­ semination of, any advertisement by means of the United States mails or by any means in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Com­ mission Act, which represents, directly or by implication, that any such product will contribute to the rapid or proper growth of children by providing dramatic or substantial benefits for such growth or development unless such product, by itself, will In fact make a significant con­ tribution to such rapid or proper jgrowth. 3. Disseminating, or causing the dis­ semination of, any advertisement by means of the United States mails or by any means in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commis­ sion Act, which misrepresents, in any manner, the nutritional content, efficacy or functional value to the user for the normal use of any such product by con­ sumers.

4. Disseminating or causing the dis­ semination of, any advertisement by any means, for the purpose of inducing, or which is likely to induce, directly or in­ directly, the purchase of any such prod­ uct, in commerce, as “commerce” is de­ fined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, which contains any of the repre­ sentations prohibited in Paragraph 1 above or the misrepresentations pro­ hibited in Paragraph 2 above. It is further ordered, That respondents shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of their operating divisions. It is further ordered, That respondents notify the Commission at least thirty (30) days prior to any proposed change in the corporate respondent such as dis­ solution, assignment or sale resulting in the emergence of a successor corporation, the creation or dissolution of subsidiaries or any other change in the corporation which may affect compliance obligations arising out of the order. It is further ordered, That respondents shall, within sixty (60) days after service of this order upon it, file with the Com­ mission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form of its com­ pliance with the order to cease and de­ sist.

It is further ordered, That the remain­ der of the Initial Decision be vacated and the following supplementary Findings of Fact made by the Commission itself, af­ ter a consideration of the entire record, be substituted therefor:

By the Commission. Chairman Engman not concurring in that portion of the Opinion which dismisses charges of unfairness against advertising claims di­ rected primarily at children and submit­ ting a separate statement; Commis­ sioner Jones recorded as dissenting in No. 222—Pt. I- FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 222— MONDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1973

Page 26

31828 part for the reasons set forth in her dis­ senting statement; and Commissioner Thompson not participating since this matter was tried and argued before he was sworn in.1 Issued: October 19,1973. [seal] Charles A. Tobin, Secretary.

[PR Doc.73-24544 Filed ll-16-73;8:45 am]