In Canada a performance claim has to be supported by adequate and proper testing done before the claim is made. Not after a complaint, not after the campaign performs well. Before.

The timing is the part people miss

The obligation is to have the substantiation in hand at the moment the claim goes out. Producing a study three months later because somebody objected does not cure the problem, and that sequencing catches out brands who assume they can justify a claim if challenged.

What counts as a performance claim

Anything measurable. Lasts twice as long, reduces X by a percentage, works in thirty seconds, outperforms the leading alternative. If a viewer could in principle test whether it is true, it is a claim that needs support.

Creator enthusiasm is where this bites

A creator saying the battery lasted them three days is describing their experience. A creator saying the battery lasts three days is stating a product claim. The difference is a single word and it changes who has to prove what.

Testimonials are not substantiation

One person's genuine experience does not establish that a product performs a certain way generally. Testimonials can support a video, but they cannot replace testing behind a measurable claim, and presenting them as proof is its own problem.

The practical version

Keep a short list of approved claims with the supporting evidence attached, hand the creator only what is on that list, and let everything else be phrased as personal experience. This is general information and not legal advice.

Keep reading

Find creators for your campaign →

Frequently asked questions

When must testing exist?

Before the claim is made.

What is a performance claim?

Anything a viewer could test.

Do testimonials substantiate a claim?

No, they are not evidence of general performance.

How should a creator phrase it?

As their own experience.