The USDA's Viral 'Wood Milk' Ad Is Apparently Violating Federal Law

Advertising can be filled with hyperbole. And while those statements can be eye-catching, they can't cross a line by touting false or harmful claims. The USDA's April "wood milk" ad might have sought to cut the popularity of plant-based milk, but the Physicians Committee, a nonprofit public health advocacy organization, says the marketing went too far. The organization's May 25 complaint alleges that the advertising campaign violated federal law by disparaging plant-based milks.

According to 7 U.S.C. § 6407, a program under this code cannot make "false or unwarranted statements with respect to the attributes or use of any competing products." The complaint focuses on the advertisement's claims that "wood milk" is "fake" and has "zero nutritional value." By using these subjective terms, the Physicians Committee asserts that the advertisement's sole purpose is to disparage non-dairy milk options. With the FDA asking for commentary regarding the naming options for plant-based milks, the "wood milk" ad appears to be trying to influence federal legislation through the disparaging words in the script. Because organizations' funds cannot be used to influence government action, this advertisement is potentially violating that regulation as well.

The complaint asks the USDA to require corrective advertising with language that clarifies plant based milk can have the same nutritional value as dairy milk. The video cannot be unseen, but the additional language will try to piece back together a balanced milk story.

While a thesaurus might be a writer's best friend, it can be difficult to describe in words the experience of eating or drinking a particular item. In reality, flavor is subjective. But subjectivity within the advertising regulation world is not conducive.

The complaint regarding the "Wood Milk" campaign questions whether particular words crossed a line. Although some advertisements lean into satire to make a joke, statements regarding nutritional value are far from laughable. Misleading or false terms can cause consumer confusion. Some people will instantly recognize that Cran-leche was an April Fools Day prank, but the concept was not intended to say that dairy milk should not be purchased because it has no value. When a line is crossed, the damage is done. 

As the milk wars battle over the terms whether non-dairy beverages can use the term "milk," the language will continue to escalate. Even though terms like "real" might be subjective, it's the purpose behind the term that needs to be evaluated. When humor crosses into mockery, it can impact a company's bottom line. Like any war, there are terms of engagement. And this ad might have violated those laws.