Prevalence of Illegal Online Advertisements among Aesthetic Medical Clinics in Mueang District within a Southern Province

Main Article Content

จุฬาลักษ์ พชรทิพย์

Abstract

Objective: To study the prevalence of illegal online advertising of aesthetic medical clinics in Mueang district of a southern province. Method: The researcher collected all online media ads during the 3-month period (August-October, 2016) of all 10 aesthetic medical clinics in the study area excluding dermatological and plastic surgery clinics. Examination of ads in YouTube, facebook, twitter, instagram, and the clinics’ websites revealed that all clinics used facebook as advertising media. Furthermore, ads appearing on facebook were advertised in other channels as well. This study selected ads on facebook to investigate the content violating the Notification of the Ministry of Public Health No. 11 (2003) under the Sanatorium Act 1998, the Statement of the Medical Council of Thailand No. 50/2549 on words prohibited in advertising, and the resolution of the Sanatorium Committee on the advertising of sanatoriums. Results: All clinics had unlawful advertising. Among 275 facebook ads of the clinics, 223 or 81.09% were illegal. One hundred fifty seven ads (70.40 % of illegal ads) violated the Notification on rules, procedures and conditions for advertising of sanatoriums. Article 4.1 in the Notification, using false statements, disclosing the facts partially, using misleading statements) was the most frequently violated article. Articles in the Notification of the Medical Council most frequently violated were articles 1 (using the word “only”) and 9 (using the word “free of charge”). Thirty-nine (17.48%) and 39% (17.48%) of illegal ads violated the articles, respectively. The resolution of the Sanatorium Committee was most violated on Botox Advertising (76 ads or 34.08% of illegal ads). Conclusion: The most legally violated issues by online advertising of aesthetic medical clinics in this research were the use of false statements, disclosing of facts partially, using misleading statements. Relevant parties can use ads statements found in the study to formulate the guideline for approving ads of sanatoriums within their area, and to suggest the Department of Health Care Support to develop a manual for the competent authority on such issues in order to reduce the exercise of different discretion. The effort would be in accordance with the new law that requires the advertisement of a sanatorium to be approved by the regulator.

Article Details

Section
Research Articles

References

1. Bureau of Information, Ministry of Public Health. Director-general of the Department of Health Service Support warns importing ‘Korean doctors’ is illegal [online]. 2016 [cited October 5, 2016]. Available form: pr.moph.go.th/iprg/include/admin_ho tnew/show_hotnew.php?idHot_new=86503.

2. Muangkham P. Relationship between social network media exposure and attitude towards facial cosme tic surgery among working women. [independent study]. Bangkok: Thammasat University; 2015.

3. Youngsabuy P. The influence of online media on surgery intention among women in Bangkok. [master thesis]. Bangkok: National Institute of Development Administration; 2015.

4. Boonyasuruk S. Video content marketing and consumers’ decision on plastic surgery. [indepen dent study]. Bangkok: Bangkok University; 2016.

5. Manageronline. The esthetic medical clinics are warned not to advertise exaggerated statements, intensive inspection will start in March [online]. 2011 [cited April 15, 2018]. Available form: www.thaihealth.or.th/Content/4649-เตือนคลินิกเสริมความงามอย่าโฆษณาเกินจริง%20ตรวจเข้มมีนานี้.html.

6. Sanatorium Act B.E. 2541. Royal Gazette No. 115, Part 15A (Mar 24, 1998).

7. Public Health Ministerial Declaration No. 11 in 2003 on rules, procedures and conditions for advertising of sanatoriums. Royal Gazette No. 120, Part 77D special (Jul 16, 2003).

8. Announcement of Statement of the Medical Council of Thailand No. 50/2549 on words prohibited in advertising.