The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2025
Zen Word's word game was endorsed by a 'neurologist' who existed only in the ad
Word-game ads had a 'neurologist' praise Zen Word for fighting Alzheimer's and memory loss. The RCC found no real doctor — no defence was filed.
Zen Word · 2025-02-11
What happened
Ads for Zen Word, an online word game shown during other games, quoted a 'neurologist' recommending the game: 'As a neurologist, I strongly advise against playing simple, boring games for mental engagement, especially for seniors like my 60-year-old mother.' The ad said Zen Word 'actively stimulates the brain', improving memory and sleep, and even preventing memory problems and Alzheimer's.
A complainant argued the game was recommended by fake ('nep') neurologists to people suffering from Alzheimer's, and that no real doctor had endorsed it.
The advertiser filed no defence, so it never proved that any recognised expert had made the statements attributed to them.
The RCC chairman ruled the advertising breached Article 7 of the Dutch Advertising Code (professional diligence) in combination with Article 9 (testimonials must be truthful). A consumer would reasonably trust that a cited neurologist actually endorsed the game; without proof, the consumer could make a transaction they would not have made otherwise. The chairman ordered the advertising to stop.
Why it happened
- Attributing a product recommendation to an expert makes the expert the proof — and no real neurologist was ever produced
- Senior audiences with memory concerns are the most vulnerable to a claim that a game prevents Alzheimer's
- Filing no defence meant the endorsement was never shown to be anything but invented
The lesson
A testimonial is only as good as the person behind it. Quoting a 'neurologist' who never existed turned a memory-game ad into a medical promise no one could verify.
Aftermath
The RCC chairman found the Zen Word ads breached Article 7 NRC (professional diligence) combined with Article 9 NRC (testimonials must be truthful). Because the advertiser filed no defence, no evidence showed a recognised neurologist had made the quoted statements recommending the game against memory problems and Alzheimer's. A consumer would reasonably believe the cited expert genuinely endorsed it, creating a risk of a transaction that would not otherwise have occurred. The chairman instructed the advertiser to stop advertising in that manner.
Sources
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
TonyBet's 'I made $8,500 last month' single-mum ad pulled by ASAI
bwin called its bets 'risk-free' — one customer's DKK 15 payout proved they weren't
Hollandsnieuwe's 'doubled, sharper-priced' bundles — the €4.50 lasted only 12 months
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →
Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.