Thesis · September 018 citations reads 199 author: Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects

1.3. Theoretical framework 
The main theory of advertising regulation based on Commercial Speech Doctrine brought 
by the US Supreme Court within First Amendments protection in 1976.
19
After Supreme Court 
clarified that misleading advertising is out of the constitutional protection, the issue on how to 
regulate misleading advertising was debatable. Accordingly, Commercial Speech Doctrine 
determined three main questions to regulate misleading advertising in proper way. (1) How much 
regulation is permissible? (2) How government should protect us (competitors and consumers) 
from misleading advertising? (3) What method of regulation can be applied towards misleading 
advertising?
To answer to this question the US Supreme Court developed an Integrated Model of 
Restriction of Commercial Speech
20
. The model concluded that the regulation of misleading 
advertising should be (1) less strict, (2) direct, and (3) content-based. Less strict regulation 
connotes that, even misleading advertising does not enjoy constitutional regulation, it should not 
be totally banned.
21
Indeed, strict regulatory policy towards misleading advertising can suppress 
true information.
22
Direct regulation means that regulation should be directed to identify and 
eliminate deceptive statements from commercial messages.
23
Finally, content-based regulation 
19
The Virginia Pharmacy case states that commercial advertisement enjoys at least First Amendment protection, 
but not how much. Va. Pharmacy Bd. v. Va. Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (Supreme Court 1976). However, 
Central Hudson test clarifies that misleading advertising is out of protection. Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. 
Public Serv. Comm’n of NY, 447 U.S. 557 (Supreme Court 1980). 
20
The Model examined the integration of information and competition effects of promotional bans. See Fred 
McChesney, “Commercial Speech in the Professions: The Supreme Court’s Unanswered Questions and Questionable 
Answers,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 134, no. 1 (December 1, 1985): 45. p.66.
21
The Model concluded that more restrictive regulation of misleading advertising makes information more 
costly, and consequently consumers who do purchase products or services make worth-informed decision.
⁠ 
See: Fred 
S. McChesney, “De-Bates and Re-Bates: The Supreme Court’s Latest Commercial Speech Cases,” Supreme Court 
Economic Review 5 (1997): 81–139. p.87. 
22
Strict regulatory policy towards advertising is considered as harmful policy. See Bergh and Pacces, Regulation 
and Economics. p.158. 
23
Paul Siegel, Communication Law in America, Fourth edition (the USA: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014). p.378 

---

should be applied towards misleading advertising because deceptive messages in advertisement 
are determined by textual analysis of its context.
24
However, in my opinion, Commercial Speech Doctrine and its Integrated Model could not 
clearly describe direct regulation - how to identify deceptive message in advertisement - which 
refers to legal standards for misleading advertising. The reason for this is distinct nature and 
complexity of legal standards. There is no unique legal requirement that can be applied to all 
deceptive claims. Moreover, it is impossible to identify deception in advertisement without 
involving economic and cognitive theories which have an impact on legal requirements.
25
Furthermore, the Doctrine and its Model made focus on regulation in respect of government and 
business interests, but did not consider public interests.
26
Later, Consumerism has become a main 
part of misleading advertising regulation, which considers three key questions as criteria.
27
(1) 
Can 
consumer comprehend advertising information? (2) How much information should be provided to 
consumer? (3) In what format advertising information should be supplied to consumer?
28
Thus, effective regulation of misleading advertising depends on clear legal standards 
which includes not only government regulation of deception as business practice, but also criteria 
those involve public interests and consumer protection issues. Since legal requirements need 
24
Ibid. p.383. 
25
Regulators need to include evaluation criteria for consumer perception of advertising message and economic 
decision-making effected by advertisement. See Jef I. Richards, Deceptive Advertising : Behavioral Study of a Legal 
Concept / (Hillsdale, N.J. : L. Erlbaum Associates, 1990).; Wayne Hoyer and Deborah Maclnnis, “Consumerism and 
Public Policy Issues,” in Consumer Behavior, 4th edition (Houghton Mifflin, 2007), 531. 
26
Although Justice Blackmun, in Virginia Pharmacy case, mentioned about public interests matter in decision 
making by stating that consumers might be intelligent and well informed. See Va. Pharmacy Bd. v. Va. Consumer 
Council, 425 U.S. 748 (Supreme Court 1976). 
27
Consumerism can be understood as social studies on protection of consumers against harmful products or 
business methods, especially from dishonest business activity and advertising. “Cambridge Dictionary,” English 
Dictionary, Consumerism (Cambridge University Press, 2018).; As activity, consumerism is the set of activities of 
government, business, independent organizations, and concerned consumers that are designed to protect the rights of 
consumers. {Citation}; Consumerism is the area of law which protects and safeguards the interests of consumers, 
defined as users of material goods and services for personal use. “Consumerism - Consumer Protection,” Corporative 
web-site, Windgroup.it, (2018).; Consumerism became a cricial issue in law after Consumer Bill of Rights proposed 
by the US President John F. Kennedy in 1962, which guaranteed consumers several basic rights fundamental to the 
effective functioning in market economy. “Speech of the President of the United States John F. Kennedy: 93 - Special 
Message to the Congress on Protecting the Consumer Interest,” Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The 
American Presidency Project, (March 15, 1962). 
28
Hoyer and Maclnnis, “Consumerism and Public Policy Issues.” 

---

special analysis, the research emphasizes on nature of legal requirements concerning misleading 
advertising.