Question: Do you feel that there are ethical issues with what these companies are or were doing?
If so, which if any of the AMA ethical values appear to be compromised by each of these?
Jolie Peau
A well-known cosmetic company markets a luxury anti-wrinkle skin cream called Jolie Peau that sells for $300. The extra “luxury” ingredients are silicone (for glide) and light-reflecting mica (for glow), neither of which reduces wrinkles. Otherwise, it has the same ingredients as other face creams costing $10-20. The ads use attractive female celebrities who claim they noticed fewer wrinkles. Sales have been good, especially considering the product’s high price. The company has decided to remove those luxury ingredients, which are expensive to include, and sell a stripped-down version called Jolie Peau 2 for $79. They believe people who can’t afford the $300 will buy it because of the celebrity endorsements and brand recognition even though the product will have the same ingredients as those costing $10-20 a jar.
Match.com
In 2019, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sued online dating service Match.com,, alleging the company used what they determined were fake love interest advertisements to trick hundreds of thousands of consumers into purchasing paid subscriiptions on Match.com. “We believe that Match.com conned people into paying for subscriiptions via messages the company knew were from scammers,” said Andrew Smith, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. Match allows users to create Match.com profiles free of charge but prohibits users from responding to messages without upgrading to a paid subscriiption. According to the FTC’s complaint, Match sent emails to nonsubscribers stating that someone had expressed an interest in that consumer. Specifically, when nonsubscribers with free accounts received likes, favorites, emails, and instant messages on Match.com, they also received emailed ads from Match encouraging them to subscribe to Match.com to view the identity of the sender and the content of the communication. A typical message might say, “He just emailed you! You caught his eye and now he’s expressed interest in you…Could he be the one? Read his email. You will be notified when other Match.com members express interest in you.” The FTC alleges that millions of contacts that generated Match’s “You caught his eye” notices came from accounts the company had already flagged as likely to be fraudulent. By contrast, Match prevented existing paid subscribers from receiving email communications from a suspected fraudulent account. Only the “free” users got them. Many consumers purchased subscriiptions because of these deceptive ads, hoping to meet a real user who might be “the one.” The FTC alleges that instead, these consumers often would have found a scammer on the other end.
