What the law really requires of commercial advertising, and the difference between having some French and being compliant.
French must be at least as prominent
The rule that surprises teams from elsewhere.
It is not enough for a French version to exist: it must occupy at least the same place, with the same visibility, as the other language.
Three practical consequences. A video published in English with smaller French subtitles is not equivalent. A bilingual accompanying text where French comes second may be a problem. And a landing page defaulting to English cancels the effort made on the video.
It goes beyond the advertisement itself
Four media are concerned, and they are regularly forgotten.
The text accompanying the post.
The page the video sends to.
The automatic messages sent after a purchase.
And customer service, including its written replies.
A campaign perfectly compliant in its video but pointing to a page in another language is not compliant as a whole.
Automatic translation is a visible failure
The shortcut that costs the most, and it is spotted in one sentence.
A translation produced with no review gives turns of phrase nobody uses there, vocabulary from elsewhere, and approximate agreement. The audience notices before the compliance question even arises, and the effect on credibility is immediate.
The method that works: have the text written directly in the language by somebody from the market, rather than translated. An adaptation costs roughly the same as a reviewed translation, and it produces a text people recognise as their own.
What also applies to creator videos
Three points to write into the brief.
The shooting language, decided before production and not in the edit.
The fate of imposed mentions, which must exist in the required language and stay readable.
And the text burnt into the screen, which is part of the message and follows the same rules as the rest.
One production precaution: plan to shoot both versions on the same day, with the same person. Bringing somebody back three weeks later costs more than the second take, and the difference in light shows.
What the rule asks of an advertisement
| Element | What is expected | What causes trouble |
|---|---|---|
| On-screen text | A French version present | A slogan only in English |
| The voice | A French version available | An approximate dub |
| The brand | The name may stay as it is | An untranslated descriptor |
What is prepared from the shoot onwards
A take with no burned-in text and a take with no voice. Both allow the compliant version to be produced without reshooting, and cost thirty extra seconds on site.
What is checked before release
The full script, the on-screen notices and the relative placement of the two languages. The precise requirements are to be confirmed with a lawyer.
The practical version
Four habits, and they cover most campaigns.
Decide the language in the brief, never afterwards.
Have it reviewed by somebody from the market, before publication, with one question: would anybody from here write this sentence.
Archive every asset with its compliant version and the date.
And keep a list of what is running, where, and in which language. It is that banal document that will let you answer in two days rather than three weeks.
