The Burger King burger that is not quite the whopper they claim it is

"DOUBLE Whopper, fries, Coke - oh, and a measuring tape, please." The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against Burger King that a junk food portion was too small.

In comparison to the tall tower of meat, lettuce, tomato and bun featured in a recent television advert for the fast food franchise, investigators discovered that an actual store-bought Double Whopper burger came up short.

It is said that the camera puts on several pounds, but the ASA insisted the advert could not be re-broadcast until the size of the burger was reduced to correspond more closely to the product.

The investigation into the relative size of the Double Whopper was triggered by three complaints from consumers who believed the Double Whopper was smaller and less substantial than the product featured in a TV advert.

The advert also showed a man singing of his preference for Double Whoppers, before joining other fans with banners saying "Eat this meat" and "I am man".

To check the veracity of the chain's products, two ASA investigators purchased two Double Whoppers at separate London restaurants and, after a careful examination, concluded that not only were the actual burgers smaller and thinner than those in the advert, but that the salad topping was more meagre than the thick and lush vegetation piled on top of the TV Double Whopper.

The conclusion drawn by these culinary detectives was that the advert did indeed give a "misleading impression" of the size of the Double Whopper burger.

Yesterday the ASA ruled the company had breached the industry code on misleading advertising and implications.

The ASA said: "Although the ones we purchased consisted of two burgers, as in the ad, the thickness of the burgers, the quantity of additional fillings and the subsequent overall heightwere considerably less than in the ad."

A second complaint that the advert encouraged people to eat too much unhealthy food or associated eating meat with masculinity was not upheld.

The Children's Food Campaign criticised the decision not to uphold its complaint that the ad associated eating "large amounts of meat with masculinity, thus putting pressure on boys to consume unhealthy food".

The ad showed a man using a harness to pull a large truck, while a woman held a Double Whopper in front of him.

Last night, Richard Watts, the Children's Food Campaign co-ordinator said: "The ASA could have used this opportunity to protect children from advertising for unhealthy products, such as this burger, but chose to side with the industry instead."

He went on: "The ASA is an industry-run body, enforcing an advertising code drawn up by the industry. The sooner we break up this cosy little monopoly the better."

But the ASA, in its dismissal of the complaint, said the scenes of men performing feats of strength gave a "comic and ironic view of masculinity".

It said: "We did not consider they were likely to put pressure on boys to consume unhealthy food in the manner suggested by the complainants."

It also added that most foods could form part of a balanced diet.

Burger King argued that the ad presented the Double Whopper as an entire meal and that it was not shown around programmes aimed at children.

Sustain, which co-ordinates The Children's Food Campaign, said the burger contained more than half the amount of saturated fat an adult male should eat each day.

A spokesman for Burger King said last night no special effects other than studio lighting had been used to photograph its product. He said: "We will fully co-operate with the ASA in addressing the findings of their adjudication.

"Our aim is to ensure that the product seen in our advertising accurately represent those served in our restaurants. We will continue to work closely with the relevant regulatory bodies to ensure that this aim is consistently achieved."

Toothpaste maker told to drop misleading ad claim

THE makers of Colgate toothpaste were yesterday warned by an advertising watchdog not to repeat their famous slogan that "more than 80 per cent of dentists recommend Colgate".

A poster for the toothpaste provoked the ban from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) after it investigated a survey behind the claim.

The industry watchdog discovered that the questions in the poll allowed each dentist to recommend several toothpastes and brands, not just a single choice.

Banning the company's well-known boast that eight out of ten dentists endorsed its toothpaste, the ASA found that it breached the rules that bar health professionals from plugging products.

"Another competitor's brand was recommended almost as much as the Colgate brand by the dentists surveyed," said the ASA.

"The claim misleadingly implied 80 per cent of dentists recommended Colgate toothpastes in preference to all other brands of toothpaste."

The advert was also found to break the industry's guidelines in relation to truthfulness and the endorsement of medicines.

Healthcare giants Colgate-Palmolive were investigated by the ASA after a member of the public challenged the claim.

Yesterday the company denied the advert was misleading and insisted the dentists had taken part in the survey voluntarily. They said all the participants knew the results might be used in adverts.

A spokeswoman for the Patients' Association condemned the advert as misleading, adding: "Colgate is not doing itself any favours.

"Patients must have the full story... and if the information is skewed then people simply won't trust these adverts."

TANYA THOMPSON

Insurers given ultimatum over misleading claims in adverts

INSURANCE firms were yesterday warned over misleading adverts that make unsubstantiated "savings claims".

The Financial Services Authority called on companies to stop using unclear savings boasts in their adverts or face regulatory action.

It follows a review of press advertisements from 57 firms selling motor, home and travel insurance.

The regulator found that more than half of motor insurance adverts with savings claims were unclear or misleading.

It also aired the same concerns with a quarter of home insurance advertising, but travel insurers were found to have higher standards.

Insurance adverts can be misleading if they give the impression that most consumers are eligible for premium savings which are, in reality, available to only a few, the FSA said.

Vernon Everitt, retail themes director at the FSA, said: "Most people rely on some form of insurance to protect them, and advertising is a major influence on what they choose to buy. So it must be clear, fair and not misleading, leaving people with a balanced picture of what is on offer."

He added: "We will be back in three months to assess progress and will then decide if further action is needed."

MATT WILLIAMS