After reviewing the case, the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) ruled in KFC’s favour, deciding that the fast-food giant had not misled consumers. While the board acknowledged that clearer disclaimers could help avoid future confusion, it ultimately found that the advertisement complied with industry standards.
The ARB noted that the advertisement depicted five pieces of chicken, two of which were clearly drumsticks, while the others were less identifiable. The ruling stated that while some customers might prefer certain cuts over others, the meal did contain five pieces of chicken as
advertised. The board also acknowledged that KFC’s terms and conditions specify that images are for illustrative purposes only.
While the complaint was dismissed, the ARB suggested that a more prominent disclaimer—such as "pieces may vary"—could help manage consumer expectations.
This ruling follows another recent ARB decision against Mr. D Food, where a consumer complaint about misleading discount codes was upheld. Customers reported seeing promotional discounts on the app, only to find at checkout that the codes had expired or were no longer valid. The ARB ruled that such advertising was misleading, highlighting the increasing scrutiny of online food platforms. However its important to note the advertiser is not a member of the ARB and does not have to adhere to the ruling.
As more consumers turn to mobile apps and online platforms for fast food orders, advertising accuracy is becoming a critical issue. Perhaps the rise in complaints suggests that businesses need to refine their digital marketing practices to ensure transparency and maintain customer trust.
Danette Breitenbach 20 hours
