Business ProfileforTextbook Media Press

On May 6, 2022, BBB contacted this business regarding the advertising claims made on their website. Specifically the BBB asked for documentation to support the claims about the costs for books and overall costs of colleges, including tuition increases and student debt.  The BBB also asked for documentation to support the testimonials used on the website, per the BBB Code of Advertising (see below).  Despite several contacts by email, postal mail and phone, the business did not respond to BBB.  

The BBB Code of Advertising states: 

1. Basic Principles of the Code
1.1 The primary responsibility for truthful and non-deceptive advertising rests with the advertiser. Advertisers should be prepared to substantiate any objective claims or offers made before publication or broadcast. Upon request, they should present such substantiation promptly to the advertising medium or BBB.
1.2 Advertisements which are untrue, misleading, deceptive, fraudulent, falsely disparaging of competitors, or insincere offers to sell, shall not be used.
1.3 An advertisement as a whole may be misleading by implication, although every sentence separately considered may be literally true.
1.4 Misrepresentation may result not only from direct statements, but by omitting or obscuring a material fact.

5. Comparison with current price of comparable products or services sold by the advertiser or by others
5.1 Advertisers should be reasonably certain that the comparative price does not appreciably exceed the price at which substantial sales of comparable products or services have been made in the trade area for which the claim is made for a reasonably substantial period of time, in the recent, regular course of business. Such comparisons must be substantiated by the advertiser prior to making any advertised comparisons. Descriptive terminology often used by advertisers includes: “comparable value,” “compares with products or services selling at $_____,” “equal to products or services selling for $_____.”
5.2 In all such cases, the advertiser must make certain that the comparable products or services are similar in all material and significant respects.

6. List prices
6.1  “List price,” “manufacturer's list price,” “reference price,” “suggested retail price,” and similar terms, hereinafter collectively referred to as “list price,” may be used deceptively to state or imply a savings which was not, in fact, the case. To the extent that a list price does not in fact correspond to the price at which substantial sales of the product in question have been made, the advertisement of a reduction may mislead the consumer. Such a comparison must be substantiated by the advertiser prior to making any advertised comparison.
6.2 An advertiser, however, can also reference a list price non-deceptively where the advertiser:
6.2.1 Does not describe the difference as a “savings,” or use any other words of similar meaning; and
6.2.2 Clearly and conspicuously discloses2 that the list price may not necessarily be the price at which the product or service is sold. This disclosure may be unnecessary in situations where consumers generally know that the list price may not necessarily be the price at which the product or service is sold. This may be the case, for example, when an automobile dealer references, in its ad, a new car’s Monroney Sticker price.

27. Superiority Claims-Comparatives-Disparagement
27.1 Advertisers must not deceptively or falsely disparage a competitor or competing products or services in their advertising. Truthful comparisons using factual information may help consumers make informed buying decisions, provided:
27.1.1 All representations are consistent with the general rules and prohibitions against false and deceptive advertising;
27.1.2 All comparisons that claim or imply, unqualifiedly, superiority to competitive products or services are not based on a selected or limited list of characteristics in which the advertiser excels while ignoring those in which the competitor excels;
27.1.3 The advertisement clearly and conspicuously discloses any material or significant limitations of the comparison; and
27.1.4 The advertiser can substantiate all claims made.

28. Objective Superlative Claims
Superlative statements in advertisements about the tangible qualities and performance values of a product or service are objective claims for which the advertiser must possess substantiation as they can be based upon accepted standards or tests. As statements of fact, such claims, like “#1 in new car sales in the city,” can be proved or disproved.

30. Testimonials and Endorsements
30.1 In general, advertising which uses testimonials or endorsements is likely to mislead or confuse if:
30.1.1 It is not genuine and does not actually represent the current opinion of the endorser;
30.1.2 The actual wording of the testimonial or endorsement has been altered in such a way as to change its overall meaning and impact;
30.1.3 It contains representations or statements which would be misleading if made directly by the advertiser;
30.1.4 While literally true, it creates deceptive implications;
30.1.5 The endorser has not been a bona fide user of the endorsed product or service at the time when the endorsement was given, where the advertiser represents that the endorser uses the product or service;
30.1.6 It is not clearly stated that the endorser, associated with some well-known and highly-regarded institution, is speaking only in a personal capacity, and not on behalf of such an institution, if such be the fact;
30.1.7 The advertising makes broad claims as to the endorsements or approval by indefinitely large or vague groups, for example, “the homeowners of America,” “the doctors of America;”
30.1.8 The endorser has a financial interest in the company whose product or service is endorsed and this is not made known in the advertisement;
30.1.9 An expert endorser does not possess the qualifications that give the endorser the expertise represented in the advertisement;
30.1.10 The advertiser represents, directly or by implication, that the endorser is an “actual consumer” when such is not the case and the advertisement fails to clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact;
30.1.11 A consumer’s experience represented in an advertisement is not the typical experience of those using the product or service, unless the advertisement clearly and conspicuously discloses what the expected results will be;
30.1.12 Endorsements placed by advertisers in online blogs or on other third-party websites do not clearly and conspicuously disclose the connection to the advertiser and comply with each of the provisions in this Code; and
30.1.13 Advertisers compensate consumers for leaving feedback on third-party online blogs or websites but fail to ensure that consumers disclose such facts on those blogs or websites.
In the U.S., advertisers should consult the Federal Trade Commission Guides on Testimonials and Endorsements for detailed guidance. In Canada, advertisers should review the Competition Bureau’s publication on Untrue, Misleading or Unauthorized Use of Tests and Testimonials for specific guidance.