Celebrity Endorsement Liability Claims

1. Introduction

Celebrity endorsement liability claims arise when a celebrity, influencer, athlete, actor, public figure, or other prominent personality promotes, recommends, represents, or endorses a product, service, investment, scheme, or business and the endorsement is alleged to be false, misleading, deceptive, negligent, unlawful, or otherwise harmful.

Celebrity endorsements have significant persuasive power because consumers may rely not merely upon the product's stated characteristics but upon the celebrity's reputation, expertise, lifestyle, personal experience, or apparent approval. Consequently, modern consumer-protection law increasingly treats endorsements as a regulated form of commercial communication rather than purely personal expression.

In India, liability may arise under several legal regimes, particularly:

Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020

Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements for Misleading Advertisements, 2022

Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) Code

Contract law

Tort principles, including negligence and misrepresentation

Intellectual property and passing-off principles

Food, drugs, securities, financial-services and other sector-specific legislation

Criminal law in appropriate cases involving fraud, cheating, or other statutory offences.

The central legal question is usually whether the celebrity merely participated in advertising or whether the circumstances justify imposing personal legal responsibility for the representation communicated to consumers.

2. Meaning of Celebrity Endorsement

A celebrity endorsement occurs when a well-known individual uses their public reputation to promote a commercial product, service, brand, organization, or claim.

Examples include:

an actor promoting a fairness or cosmetic product;

a cricketer promoting nutritional supplements;

a film celebrity promoting a financial investment;

an influencer recommending an online platform;

a public personality promoting a health product;

a celebrity claiming that a particular product produced a particular result;

a celebrity recommending an educational or professional service.

The endorsement may be:

Express – the celebrity expressly states that the product is effective.

Implied – the celebrity's conduct conveys approval.

Testimonial-based – the celebrity claims personal experience.

Expert-based – the celebrity appears to possess relevant expertise.

Comparative – the celebrity compares one product favourably with another.

Sponsored social-media content – the celebrity publishes paid promotional content.

Digital/influencer endorsement – promotion occurs through Instagram, YouTube, X, podcasts, livestreams, etc.

3. Why Celebrity Endorsement Creates Legal Risk

Ordinary advertising already creates potential liability when representations are false or misleading. Celebrity endorsements create an additional problem because consumers may attach greater credibility to statements made by a famous person.

For example:

“I personally used this medicine and it cured my condition.”

may create a much stronger consumer impression than a conventional advertisement simply stating that a product is available.

The celebrity's reputation may therefore become part of the commercial representation.

The law consequently focuses upon:

truthfulness;

substantiation;

disclosure of material information;

reasonable consumer expectations;

the celebrity's knowledge;

due diligence;

the nature of the product;

the seriousness of the representation;

whether the celebrity actually used the product;

whether the celebrity possessed relevant expertise;

whether the endorsement was paid or sponsored;

whether consumers suffered loss because of reliance.

4. Statutory Framework in India

A. Consumer Protection Act, 2019

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is the principal Indian legislation governing misleading advertisements and consumer protection.

A particularly important provision is Section 2(28), which defines a misleading advertisement.

Broadly, an advertisement may be misleading where it:

falsely describes a product or service;

gives a false guarantee;

is likely to mislead consumers regarding the nature, substance, quantity, or quality of goods or services;

conveys a representation that constitutes an unfair trade practice;

deliberately conceals important information.

The Act also establishes the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA).

5. Liability of Endorsers Under the Consumer Protection Act

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 expressly addresses liability connected with misleading advertisements.

Under Section 21, the CCPA can take action against misleading advertisements.

Depending upon the circumstances, the Authority may:

direct discontinuation or modification of a misleading advertisement;

impose penalties;

impose penalties upon manufacturers, advertisers and endorsers;

prohibit an endorser from endorsing products or services for a specified period.

This is important because traditional advertising law often concentrated on the manufacturer or advertiser, whereas modern consumer law recognizes that an endorser may contribute substantially to the misleading representation.

6. Due Diligence Defence

Celebrity liability is not necessarily automatic.

The Consumer Protection Act recognizes the importance of due diligence in determining an endorser's responsibility.

An endorser may potentially avoid liability where the person can establish that they exercised due diligence to verify the claims contained in the advertisement.

This creates an important distinction:

Mere participation

A celebrity simply appears in an advertisement without knowing whether the underlying claim is true.

Responsible endorsement

The celebrity takes reasonable steps to verify the material claims before making or communicating them.

The second situation provides considerably stronger protection.

7. Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements, 2022

The Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements for Misleading Advertisements, 2022 are particularly important.

They regulate:

misleading advertisements;

bait advertising;

surrogate advertising;

free claims;

children's advertising;

advertisements for prohibited products;

endorsements;

disclosure of material connections.

The guidelines recognize that endorsements can materially influence consumer decision-making.

8. Disclosure of Material Connection

A celebrity who receives:

money,

commission,

gifts,

free products,

discounts,

equity,

travel benefits,

employment opportunities,

other commercial benefits,

may have a material connection with the advertiser.

Where required, that relationship should be appropriately disclosed.

Examples of disclosures include:

“Paid Partnership”

“Sponsored”

“Advertisement”

“#Ad”

The precise disclosure must be sufficiently clear, prominent and understandable to the ordinary consumer.

A disclosure hidden among numerous hashtags or placed where consumers are unlikely to notice it may be inadequate.

9. Celebrity's Duty of Due Diligence

One of the most important issues in endorsement litigation is:

How much investigation must a celebrity conduct before endorsing a product?

The answer depends upon the nature of the claim.

For a relatively ordinary consumer product, basic verification may be sufficient.

For a product involving:

medical treatment;

financial investments;

insurance;

education;

health supplements;

pharmaceuticals;

weight-loss products;

securities;

cryptocurrency;

legal services;

a greater degree of caution may reasonably be expected.

A celebrity cannot necessarily defend every misleading representation by saying:

“I was only acting in an advertisement.”

10. False Personal Testimonials

A particularly serious category arises when a celebrity falsely claims personal experience.

For example:

“I have used this treatment personally and it permanently cured my condition.”

If the celebrity never used the treatment, the statement may amount to a materially misleading representation.

Similarly:

“I invested in this scheme myself and doubled my money.”

may be problematic if the celebrity never made such an investment.

The legal risk increases because the celebrity is not merely repeating the advertiser's claim but presenting it as personal experience.

11. Health and Medical Endorsements

Health-related endorsements attract especially strict scrutiny.

Examples include claims relating to:

medicines;

medical devices;

supplements;

weight-loss products;

fertility treatments;

cosmetic procedures;

mental-health products;

disease cures;

nutritional products.

A celebrity's personal popularity does not make them medically qualified.

Thus, a celebrity should not create the impression that they possess medical expertise where they do not.

12. Financial and Investment Endorsements

Celebrity endorsements of financial products present another significant category.

Examples include endorsements involving:

investment schemes;

securities;

cryptocurrency;

trading platforms;

lending platforms;

insurance;

financial applications.

Financial decisions can involve substantial consumer losses.

Accordingly, celebrities should be particularly careful not to make statements suggesting:

guaranteed returns;

risk-free investment;

assured profits;

government approval;

guaranteed appreciation;

absence of financial risk.

A celebrity who promotes an investment opportunity may face regulatory consequences where the applicable financial legislation regulates such communications.

13. Children and Vulnerable Consumers

Endorsements aimed at children create additional concerns.

Children may have:

limited ability to evaluate advertising;

greater susceptibility to celebrity influence;

limited understanding of commercial persuasion.

Advertising directed at children is therefore subject to stronger restrictions concerning:

unhealthy food;

dangerous products;

unrealistic performance claims;

educational claims;

exploitative representations.

A celebrity's popularity among children can make misleading endorsements particularly problematic.

14. Elements of a Celebrity Endorsement Liability Claim

A claimant generally needs to establish the relevant legal basis and, depending upon the cause of action, may have to establish several elements.

14.1 Representation

There must be a representation concerning the product or service.

It may concern:

quality;

effectiveness;

safety;

performance;

price;

origin;

results;

benefits;

personal experience.

14.2 Falsity or Misleading Character

The representation must be:

false;

materially misleading;

deceptive;

unsubstantiated; or

otherwise prohibited.

14.3 Consumer Reliance

In appropriate cases, the claimant may need to show that consumers relied upon the representation.

However, consumer-protection law can also permit regulatory action against misleading advertising without requiring proof that every individual consumer actually purchased the product.

14.4 Causation

Where damages are claimed, there must generally be a connection between the misleading representation and the loss.

14.5 Damage or Legal Injury

Potential losses include:

purchase price;

medical expenses;

financial loss;

consequential loss;

compensation for deficiency or unfair trade practice;

other legally recoverable damages.

15. Celebrity Liability Versus Manufacturer Liability

The manufacturer normally remains primarily responsible for the safety and quality of its product.

However, different parties may have different responsibilities.

Liability therefore depends upon who made the representation, what was represented, and what role the celebrity played.

16. Major Defences Available to Celebrities

A celebrity facing a claim may rely upon several arguments.

1. Due diligence

The endorser exercised reasonable care to verify the claim.

2. Absence of knowledge

The celebrity had no reason to know that the representation was false.

3. No material representation

The celebrity merely appeared visually without making the disputed representation.

4. Reliance on expert evidence

The celebrity relied upon credible technical or professional material supplied by the advertiser.

5. No causation

The claimant's loss was not caused by the endorsement.

6. No consumer relationship

Depending upon the cause of action, the celebrity may argue that they were not the seller or service provider.

7. Truth of representation

The underlying representation was accurate and adequately substantiated.

17. Important Case Laws

1. Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893) 1 QB 256

This is one of the most important cases concerning advertising representations.

The manufacturer advertised a product and made a promise concerning its effectiveness. Mrs Carlill used the product according to the stated conditions but nevertheless contracted influenza.

The court held that the advertisement could constitute a binding promise when its language and circumstances demonstrated an intention to create legal obligations.

Principle

Advertising statements can have legal significance when they amount to sufficiently definite representations or promises.

Relevance to celebrity endorsements

A celebrity endorsement cannot automatically be dismissed as mere promotional “puffery.” A specific, definite representation may create legal consequences where the relevant legal requirements are satisfied.

2. Derry v. Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337

The House of Lords considered liability for fraudulent misrepresentation.

The case established an important principle concerning fraudulent statements: liability for deceit requires more than an innocent mistake; the representation must involve knowledge of falsity, lack of belief in its truth, or recklessness as to whether it was true or false.

Relevance

Where a celebrity knowingly communicates a false representation, the legal consequences can be significantly more serious than where the celebrity innocently repeats an inaccurate statement.

The case therefore helps distinguish:

fraud;

negligent misrepresentation;

innocent misrepresentation.

3. Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v. Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465

This landmark case recognized circumstances in which negligent statements may generate liability where there is a relationship involving an assumption of responsibility and reliance.

Principle

A person who possesses relevant expertise or assumes responsibility for information may potentially face liability for careless statements where the legal requirements for negligent misstatement are established.

Relevance to endorsements

A celebrity who presents themselves as possessing specialist knowledge could potentially assume greater responsibility than a celebrity who merely appears in a general advertisement.

The principle is particularly relevant to:

investment endorsements;

health claims;

technical products;

professional services.

4. White v. Jones [1995] 2 AC 207

This case considered the circumstances in which duties may arise in situations involving reliance and relationships extending beyond conventional contractual relationships.

Relevance

Celebrity endorsement claims often involve consumers who have no direct contract with the celebrity.

The case is useful in understanding the broader difficulties surrounding duties owed outside a traditional contractual relationship.

5. Grant v. Australian Knitting Mills Ltd [1936] AC 85

This leading case involved defective underwear that caused dermatitis.

The Privy Council recognized principles concerning manufacturer responsibility for latent defects and the duty owed to consumers.

Principle

A manufacturer may owe responsibilities to the ultimate consumer even where the consumer did not personally contract with the manufacturer.

Relevance

The case demonstrates the broader development of consumer protection beyond strict contractual privity.

In an endorsement dispute, however, the manufacturer's product liability and the celebrity's advertising liability remain conceptually distinct.

6. Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562

This foundational tort case established the modern neighbour principle in negligence.

Mrs Donoghue consumed ginger beer containing a decomposed snail and sought damages against the manufacturer.

The House of Lords recognized that a manufacturer could owe a duty of care to the ultimate consumer.

Relevance to celebrity endorsements

Although the case does not concern celebrity advertising, it is important for understanding how modern law can impose duties toward persons with whom the defendant has no direct contract.

It provides a conceptual foundation for analysing whether conduct causing foreseeable consumer harm can give rise to tortious responsibility.

7. Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v. Borden Inc. [1990] 1 WLR 491

This is the famous Jif Lemon case concerning passing off.

The House of Lords considered the elements of passing off, including:

goodwill;

misrepresentation;

damage.

Relevance

Celebrity endorsements can create or reinforce associations between a celebrity and a particular product or brand.

Where advertising creates a misleading association concerning sponsorship, approval, affiliation or commercial origin, passing-off principles may become relevant.

8. L'Oréal SA v. Bellure NV [2009] UKHL 44

This litigation concerned the use of trademarks and advertising in the perfume industry.

The case examined the relationship between advertising practices, trademark protection and consumer perception.

Relevance

Celebrity marketing often depends heavily upon brand identity and the public association between a celebrity and a product.

Misleading commercial associations may therefore create intellectual-property as well as consumer-protection consequences.

18. Important Indian Case Law

9. Lakhanpal National Ltd. v. M.R.T.P. Commission, 1989 Supp (2) SCC 409

The Supreme Court considered misleading advertising and the manner in which representations made to consumers should be evaluated.

Principle

The substance and likely effect of an advertisement on consumers are important considerations in determining whether a representation is misleading.

Relevance

Celebrity endorsements must be assessed according to the impression created in the mind of the ordinary consumer, rather than merely by examining isolated words.

10. Tata Press Ltd. v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (1995) 5 SCC 139

The Supreme Court dealt extensively with commercial speech and advertising.

The Court recognized that commercial speech can receive constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(a), while also recognizing that misleading or harmful commercial communications can be regulated.

Principle

Advertising is capable of being protected commercial speech, but that protection is not absolute.

Relevance

Celebrity endorsements involve commercial speech. The fact that an endorsement is an expression by a celebrity does not place it beyond reasonable statutory regulation.

11. Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha (1995) 6 SCC 651

The Supreme Court considered the applicability of consumer protection law to medical services.

Relevance

This case is important when celebrity endorsements concern healthcare or medical services because it demonstrates the significant consumer-protection interests involved in services affecting health and well-being.

A celebrity cannot convert a medically significant commercial claim into a legally immune statement simply by presenting it as personal promotion.

12. National Seeds Corporation Ltd. v. M. Madhusudhan Reddy (2012) 2 SCC 506

The Supreme Court recognized consumer remedies concerning defective agricultural seeds.

Principle

Consumer protection legislation can provide remedies where defective goods cause consumer loss.

Relevance

Where a celebrity endorsement induces consumers to purchase a defective product, responsibility for the product itself remains distinct from potential responsibility for the misleading endorsement.

The case illustrates the broader consumer-law principle that defective goods and misleading commercial practices can generate legal remedies.

19. Comparative Importance of the Cases

20. Celebrity Endorsement and Contract Law

A celebrity usually enters into an agreement with the advertiser.

The contract may contain:

representations and warranties;

morality clauses;

indemnity provisions;

exclusivity provisions;

compliance obligations;

due-diligence obligations;

termination provisions;

liability allocation;

insurance requirements.

For example, an endorsement contract may require the celebrity to represent that:

they have not knowingly made any false statement concerning the product.

Alternatively, the advertiser may contractually promise that all product claims supplied to the celebrity are scientifically substantiated.

A contractual breach may therefore create liability independently of consumer legislation.

21. Indemnification

A celebrity may negotiate an indemnity from the advertiser.

For example, the advertiser may agree to indemnify the celebrity against claims arising from:

false product specifications;

defective goods;

unsubstantiated scientific claims;

regulatory violations attributable to the advertiser.

However, indemnity does not necessarily prevent regulators or consumers from proceeding against the celebrity where the law independently imposes liability.

The celebrity may have a contractual right to recover losses from the advertiser even though a third party can separately pursue the celebrity.

22. Celebrity Endorsement and Tortious Liability

Tort liability may arise where the relevant legal elements are established.

Potential causes include:

Negligence

Where the celebrity owes an applicable duty of care and breaches it.

Misrepresentation

Where a false statement induces reliance.

Fraud/deceit

Where a false statement is knowingly or recklessly made.

Passing off

Where misleading representations create an unlawful commercial association.

Product-related claims

Where statutory or tort principles impose responsibility for particular conduct connected with the product.

23. Consumer Protection Proceedings

A consumer may complain where a misleading endorsement contributes to an:

unfair trade practice;

misleading advertisement;

defective product claim;

deficiency in service;

unfair contract;

other consumer-law violation.

Possible remedies can include:

refund;

replacement;

compensation;

discontinuance of misleading advertising;

corrective advertising;

modification of advertising claims;

regulatory penalties.

24. Role of the CCPA

The Central Consumer Protection Authority has substantial powers under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

It can investigate matters concerning consumer rights and unfair trade practices and take action concerning misleading advertisements.

For endorsements, the CCPA can consider:

what was represented;

whether the representation was substantiated;

whether the endorser exercised due diligence;

the nature of the product;

the potential harm to consumers;

the scale of the advertising campaign.

This represents a significant shift from the traditional idea that only the advertiser should bear responsibility.

25. Influencers and Social-Media Celebrities

The traditional concept of a celebrity has expanded.

Today, liability may concern:

Instagram influencers;

YouTubers;

podcasters;

streamers;

bloggers;

sports personalities;

online content creators.

The number of followers is not necessarily decisive.

A person with a smaller audience can still make a commercially significant representation.

The important questions are:

Was the communication commercial?

Was there a material connection?

Was the connection disclosed?

Was the claim accurate?

Was the claim adequately substantiated?

Did the influencer exercise appropriate due diligence?

26. “Paid Partnership” Does Not Make a False Claim Lawful

Disclosure of sponsorship and truthfulness are separate requirements.

For example:

“Paid partnership with XYZ”

may properly disclose the commercial relationship.

But disclosure does not make a false claim lawful.

Thus:

Disclosure + false claim = still potentially misleading.

Likewise:

Accurate claim + undisclosed material connection = potentially problematic.

Both transparency and truthfulness matter.

27. Puffery Versus Actionable Representation

Not every promotional statement creates liability.

Statements such as:

“The ultimate lifestyle product.”

may be treated as ordinary advertising puffery.

But a specific statement such as:

“This product reduces cholesterol by 40%.”

is objectively verifiable.

The distinction is therefore between:

Puffery

General praise or subjective opinion.

Factual representation

A statement capable of objective verification.

The more specific and objectively verifiable the celebrity's claim, the greater the need for substantiation.

28. Importance of the Celebrity's Expertise

A celebrity's expertise matters.

Suppose:

a famous actor endorses a shampoo;

a medical doctor endorses a medical treatment;

a professional athlete endorses sports equipment;

a financial expert endorses an investment.

The consumer may reasonably attribute different levels of authority to each person.

Where a celebrity possesses genuine specialist expertise, statements made in that capacity may attract heightened scrutiny.

Conversely, a celebrity should not create a false impression of expertise.

29. Causation and Damages

Suppose a consumer purchases a product after seeing a celebrity advertisement but suffers loss.

The consumer may have to establish, depending on the legal claim:

the relevant representation;

its misleading nature;

the celebrity's involvement;

reliance or the applicable statutory violation;

causation;

loss.

A celebrity may argue that:

the consumer never saw the endorsement;

the consumer purchased for another reason;

the loss resulted from misuse;

the product was defective independently of the endorsement;

the claimant cannot establish causation.

These issues can become decisive in litigation.

30. Regulatory Penalties and Civil Liability Are Different

A regulatory penalty and a private compensation claim are conceptually different.

Regulatory proceeding

The government authority may seek to stop or punish misleading advertising.

Consumer proceeding

A consumer may seek compensation or other remedies.

Contract proceeding

The celebrity or advertiser may sue for breach of their endorsement agreement.

Tort proceeding

A claimant may pursue damages under applicable tort principles.

A single advertising campaign can therefore potentially generate several forms of legal exposure.

31. Practical Example

Suppose a celebrity advertises a dietary supplement and states:

“I personally used this product and lost 15 kilograms in one month.”

Assume that:

the celebrity never used the product;

there is no scientific evidence supporting the claim;

consumers purchase the product because of the statement;

some consumers suffer financial or health consequences.

Potential issues include:

misleading advertisement;

false testimonial;

absence of due diligence;

consumer unfair trade practice;

regulatory action;

possible misrepresentation;

contractual disputes between the celebrity and advertiser.

The manufacturer may also separately face liability for the product itself.

32. Factors Courts and Regulators May Consider

A court or regulator may consider:

The exact words used.

Visual presentation.

The celebrity's status.

The celebrity's apparent expertise.

Whether the statement was factual or promotional.

Whether scientific evidence existed.

Whether the celebrity personally used the product.

Whether the endorsement was paid.

Whether sponsorship was disclosed.

The nature of the product.

The vulnerability of the target consumers.

The extent of consumer harm.

Whether the celebrity conducted due diligence.

Whether the advertiser supplied misleading information.

Whether the celebrity had reason to doubt the advertiser's claims.

33. Burden of Proof and Evidence

Important evidence may include:

advertising videos;

social-media posts;

contracts;

emails;

WhatsApp communications;

product-testing reports;

laboratory reports;

expert opinions;

invoices;

payment records;

sponsorship agreements;

consumer complaints;

scientific literature;

regulatory correspondence.

Digital evidence is particularly important because celebrity endorsements are frequently disseminated through social-media platforms.

34. Important Distinction: Product Liability Versus Endorsement Liability

These should not be confused.

Product liability

The product itself causes injury or loss because it is:

defective;

unsafe;

inadequately manufactured;

improperly designed;

accompanied by inadequate warnings.

Endorsement liability

The celebrity contributes to a misleading commercial representation.

A product may be perfectly safe but falsely advertised.

Conversely, a celebrity may make a completely accurate endorsement while the product itself is defective.

Thus, the two forms of liability can coexist but are legally distinct.

35. Key Legal Principles

The following principles summarize the modern law:

Principle 1

Celebrity status does not create immunity from advertising law.

Principle 2

An endorser can potentially face personal liability for misleading endorsements.

Principle 3

Due diligence is a major factor in determining responsibility.

Principle 4

False personal testimonials are particularly problematic.

Principle 5

Specific factual claims require substantiation.

Principle 6

Disclosure of a commercial relationship is important.

Principle 7

Disclosure does not cure a false or misleading claim.

Principle 8

Health and financial endorsements require heightened caution.

Principle 9

The manufacturer's responsibility does not automatically eliminate the endorser's responsibility.

Principle 10

The precise role played by the celebrity must be examined rather than imposing automatic liability merely because the person appeared in an advertisement.

36. Difference Between Celebrity Endorsement and Ordinary Advertising

37. Conclusion

Celebrity endorsement liability is an increasingly important area of consumer and advertising law.

The traditional assumption that a celebrity is merely an actor reading advertising copy is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain where the celebrity:

personally recommends a product;

makes factual claims;

claims personal experience;

presents themselves as an expert;

promotes a high-risk product;

receives a commercial benefit;

fails to disclose the relationship; or

fails to exercise appropriate due diligence.

Indian law, particularly through the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the 2022 Guidelines on Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements, and related regulatory frameworks, recognizes that endorsers can play a meaningful role in influencing consumer decisions.

At the same time, liability is not automatically imposed merely because a celebrity appears in an advertisement. The nature of the representation, the celebrity's involvement, the celebrity's knowledge, due diligence, consumer reliance, the nature of the product, and the applicable statutory framework must all be examined.

The modern legal position can therefore be summarized as:

Celebrity influence creates responsibility, but liability depends upon the nature of the representation, the circumstances of the endorsement, the applicable law, and the degree of care exercised by the endorser.

Celebrity endorsement law consequently represents a movement from the older model of “advertiser responsibility alone” toward a more sophisticated model of shared responsibility among manufacturers, advertisers, agencies and endorsers, particularly where consumers are exposed to objectively false, unsubstantiated, or materially misleading claims.