ment a written statement that such test or tests exist which substantiate the representation.

2. Failing to maintain and produce accurate records which may be inspected by Commission staff members upon reasonable notice:

(a) which consist of the documentation constituting the reasonable basis required by Paragraph I.1 of this order and which demonstrate that respondent's representatives relied on such reasonable basis as required in Paragraph I.1(b) of this order; and

(b) which shall be maintained by respondent for a period of three (3) years from the date on which any advertisement containing any such representation was last disseminated.

II

It is further ordered, That for the purposes of Paragraph I of this order:

1. The word "handling" shall be defined in terms of the response of the vehicle:

(a) under conditions where rapid steering inputs in evasive or emergency maneuvers are necessary;

(b) under cornering conditions at speeds in excess of 30 miles per hour in which levels of lateral acceleration in excess of .2g are attained; and

(c) in gusty crosswinds, on rough roads and under severe steeringbraking conditions.

2. A statement as to the handling characteristics of an automobile implies that the automobile is superior in handling to any other automobile or all other automobiles if the statement is phrased in the comparative or superlative degree, or if any advertising containing such statement conveys a net impression of comparative handling superiority; Provided, however, That any statement or statements in such advertising phrased in the comparative or superlative degree regarding any characteristic or characteristics other than handling will not, for that reason alone and without a statistically valid consumer survey, render any statement in such advertising which does relate to the handling characteristics of an automobile and which is phrased in the positive degree to be deemed a representation that the automobile is superior in handling to any other automobile or all other automobiles. 3. "Scientific test" shall be defined and construed in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission's order as stated in Firestone Tire [ Rubber Co., Docket No. 8818 [81 F.T.C. 398].

In our view a scientific test is one in which persons with skill and expertise in the field conduct the test and evaluate its results in a disinterested manner using testing procedures generally accepted in the profession which best insure accurate results. This

is not to say that respondent always must conduct laboratory tests. The appropriate test depends on the nature of the claim made. Thus a road or user test may be an adequate scientific test to substantiate one performance claim, whereas a laboratory test may be the proper test to substantiate another claim. Respondent's obligation is to assure that any claim it makes is adequately substantiated by the results of whatever constitutes a scientific test in those circumstances.

III

It is further ordered, That the allegations of the complaint relating to the "lubed-for-life chassis" claim for the Opel automobile be, and hereby are, dismissed and that the complaint be, and hereby is, dismissed as to respondent McCann-Erickson, Inc. Further, all information submitted to the Commission supporting the aforementioned claim shall be placed on the public record.

IV

It is further ordered, That respondent General Motors Corporation shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its officers, agents, representatives or employees who are engaged in the creation or approval of advertisements.

V

It is further ordered, That respondent General Motors Corporation notify the Commission at least thirty (30) days prior to any proposed change in said corporate respondent such as dissolution, 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 this order.

VI

It is further ordered, That respondent General Motors Corporation shall within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.

DECISION AND ORDER AS TO CAMPBELL-EWALD Co.

The Commission having issued its complaint on Dec. 11, 1972, charging the respondent named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the respondent having been served with a copy of that complaint; and

The Commission having duly determined upon motion certified to the Commission that, in the circumstances presented, the public interest

would be served by waiver here of the provision of Section 2.34(d) of its rules which provides that the consent order procedure shall not be available after issuance of complaint; and

The respondent and counsel for the Commission having executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by respondent of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission's rules; and

The Commission having thereafter considered the aforesaid agreement and having determined that it provides an adequate basis for appropriate disposition of this proceeding, and having provisionally accepted said agreement, and the agreement containing consent order having been placed on the public record for a period of sixty (60) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in Section 2.34(b) of its rules, the Commission hereby makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order in disposition of the proceeding:

1. Respondent Campbell-Ewald Co. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with its office and principal place of business located at 3044 W. Grand Blvd., in the city of Detroit, State of Michigan.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of respondent, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER

I

It is ordered, That respondent Campbell-Ewald Co., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its officers, agents, representatives, and employees, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in connection with the advertising, offering for sale, sale or distribution of any automobile, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Representing directly or by implication, in any manner, including the use of any endorsement, testimonial or statement made by any individual, group or organization, that any automobile is superior in handling to any other automobile or all other automobiles, unless at the time that any such representation is first disseminated:

(a) respondent or its client has a reasonable basis for such

representation which shall consist of a competent scientific test or tests that substantiate such representation; or

(b) respondent has a reasonable basis for such representation which shall consist of an opinion in writing signed by a person qualified by education and experience to render such an opinion (who, if qualified by education and experience, may be a person retained or employed by respondent's client) that a competent scientific test or tests exist to substantiate such representation, provided that any such opinion also discloses the nature of such test or tests and; Provided further, That respondent neither knows nor has reason to know that such test or tests do not in fact substantiate such representation or that any such opinion does not constitute a reasonable basis for such representation. 2. Failing to maintain and produce accurate records which may be inspected by Commission staff members upon reasonable notice:

(a) which consist of the documentation constituting the reasonable basis required by Paragraph I.1 of this order or, if respondent's compliance with Paragraph I.1 is based on its clients' reasonable basis, which consist of a memorandum so indicating; and

(b) which shall be maintained by respondent for a period of three (3) years from the date on which any advertisement containing any such representation was last disseminated by respondent.

II

It is further ordered, That for the purposes of Paragraph I of this order:

1. The word "handling" shall be defined in terms of the response of the vehicle:

(a) under conditions where rapid steering inputs in evasive or emergency maneuvers are necessary;

(b) under cornering conditions at speeds in excess of 30 miles per hour in which levels of lateral acceleration in excess of .2g are attained; and

(c) in gusty crosswinds, on rough roads and under severe steeringbraking conditions.

2. A statement as to the handling characteristics of an automobile implies that the automobile is superior in handling to any other automobile or all other automobiles if the statement is phrased in the comparative or superlative degree, or if any advertising containing such statement conveys a net impression of comparative handling superiority; Provided, however, That any statement or statements in such advertising phrased in the comparative or superlative degree regarding any characteristic or characteristics other than handling will not, for that reason alone and without a statistically valid consumer

survey, render any statement in such advertising which does relate to the handling characteristics of an automobile and which is phrased in the positive degree to be deemed a representation that the automobile is superior in handling to any other automobile or all other automobiles. 3. "Scientific test" shall be defined and construed in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission's order as stated in Firestone Tire [ Rubber Co., Docket No. 8818 [81 F.T.C. 398].

In our view a scientific test is one in which persons with skill and expertise in the field conduct the test and evaluate its results in a disinterested manner using testing procedures generally accepted in the profession which best insure accurate results. This is not to say that respondent always must conduct laboratory tests. The appropriate test depends on the nature of the claim made. Thus a road or user test may be an adequate scientific test to substantiate one performance claim, whereas a laboratory test may be the proper test to substantiate another claim. Respondent's obligation is to assure that any claim it makes is adequately substantiated by the results of whatever constitutes a scientific test in those circumstances.

III

It is further ordered, That respondent shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its officers, agents, representatives or employees who are engaged in the creation or approval of advertisements.

IV

It is further ordered, That respondent notify the Commission at least thirty (30) days prior to any proposed change in said corporate respondent, such as dissolution, 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 this order.

V

It is further ordered, That respondent shall within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.