Recently, the government accepted the recommendations of a parliamentary panel, which made celebrities liable for endorsing products with misleading claims. This could land them a five-year jail term and  Rs 10-50 lakh fine. In a new development, it was reported on August 31 that the proposal was now on hold. However, the news has created a furore with mixed opinions on whether celebrities should be held accountable for the brands they endorse. BT gets experts to talk on the issue...

LAWYER SPEAK

"Onus should be on the manufacturers"
City-based lawyer Majeed Memon is of the view that celebrities cannot and should not be held accountable. “Celebrities cannot be expected to vouch for the quality and standard of the product which they endorse apparently for the promotion of the product. It is the manufacturer or owners upon whom the onus is, to ensure that the quality of the product so endorsed by a celebrity is up to the mark. When a celebrity endorses a product, all that he or she promotes is that he or she likes and uses that product for him/her. Beyond that, the celebrity is not a technical expert to guarantee the purity or high standard of the product endorsed by him or her. In such circumstances, imposition of heavy fines on celebs, to my mind, does not seem justified.“

While lawyer Kranti Sathe feels the punishment may be harsh, she also affirms the socio-cultural influence or impact a celebrity might have on an individual's mind. “Yes, handing out five years for this is really disproportionate,“ she says, adding. “But some ads are misleading. For instance, we do feel that our face is going to glow like X actress after we use a product or someone might feel my hair is going to shine and a large majority may also believe they will turn fairer after using something else. This creates an impression which does not turn into reality. But I really don't know if the celebrity who endorses a product is aware of the composition or proportion of all the ingredients inside. For instance, a skin cream may later turn out to be harmful, but how can you hold any them liable for what they are not aware at the outset?“ She also advocates putting the onus on the makers. “There must be more stringent punishment for those companies that put out harmful products. The celebrities only help market the product. They are not supposed to know so much. And if they do a variety of endorsements - which is quite possible - should they be expected to know in depth information about each?“

Celebs must think twice about what they endorse

However, lawyer Satish Maneshinde has a contrary view. “First of all, anyone endorsing a product is making a representation to the public at large on the same. That he, himself, being in a high position is endorsing a product best suited to human beings and advancing a representation of the makers, so he is culpably responsible. But for his statement, no one would believe that it is meant for consumption and public good and free from health hazards. He is thus equally responsible for that product.“ He says celebs need to start thinking about what they stand for. “They have to sit back and think twice about what they endorse as they are a huge influence on the common man. If you ask me, I think the punishment should be made more stringent,“ he says.

SOCIAL VIEW

Silly to hold them responsible
Social commentator Suhel Seth finds it wrong if one holds celebrities accountable. “It's silly and absolutely wrong,“ he starts. “Yes, they should be held responsible for any ads that have social taboos, for example, endorsing gutka and a fairness cream. But look at it this way, tomorrow if there is a fire in Mumbai, will you hold the CM responsible and put him behind bars for it? Let's not forget that there are so may factors that come into play here. If tomorrow a celebrity is in an advertisement for real estate and the builder for some reason cannot give the buyers the flat, how can the celebrity be responsible for it?“ He says it must come down to the consumer. “Ultimately, the consumer is responsible. It is ultimately he or she who is making a choice. It is bizarre to blame a celebrity for endorsing something; it defies all logic and needs to be thrown out.“

WHAT THE AD GURUS SAY

Moral onus yes, legal no
Adman Prahlad Kakar says while moral responsibility for the celeb is one thing, legal responsibility is not. “If the ministers want to make such a law, then they should keep in mind that they themselves don't deliver on a majority of their promises which they make during election time. So, if they pass this law, it will come back and bite them. Also, you can't hold a celeb responsible for something he doesn't manufacture. Celebs are just soft targets. When a manufacturer wants to make a product, they take make a product, they take it to the government agencies who test it and allow it to be sold. So, yes, the moral responsibility rests with the celeb if they want to endorse a particular product. But they cannot be held legally responsible.“

The consumer must be protected
Prasoon Joshi, adman and CEO of a global marketing firm says, “Most of the times our celebrities are very cautious and choose endorsements carefully themselves. But in twisted scenarios, where the intent is adulterated, there are filters required. Who should bear the brunt of this is a complicated question to answer, as marketing and advertising have many stakeholders. However, one thing is for sure: the consumer needs to be protected at any cost from profiteering.“

Need to define 'misleading'
Piyush Pandey, national creative director of an ad agency, says, “Misleading is a difficult word to understand. In this case, it's important to know what the term means. Today, I don't know what is 'misleading', one needs to understand that.“