The current FTC Guides state that “endorsers qualifications must in fact give the endorser the expertise that the endorser is represented as possessing with respect to the endorsement.” The proposed modification of an illustrative example in the Guides implies that an endorser of a hearing aid should not be referred to as “Doctor” as this implies that the endorser is a medical doctor. The text goes on to note that “a non-medical doctor” (e.g., an individual with a Ph.D. in audiology) might be able to endorse the product if the advertisement discloses the nature and limits of the endorser’s experience.
The Academy comments highlight current educational training and scope of practice for audiology in all 50 states and references the 2022 Academy Position Statement that supports the use of the title “doctor” for members who have earned doctoral degrees from accredited institutions, with the provision that the audiologist provide clarification as to which field they hold their doctorate. The Academy letter requests that this illustrative example be amended to reflect this clarification.
Recent Posts
Leveling the Playing Field at AAA 2026
Wednesday, April 22 | 12:30–2:00 pm Earn 0.15 CEUs Concussion care is no longer a single-discipline effort. As research continues to reveal concussion as a…
How to Get Patient Referrals through Your ABA Certification
Did you know that ABA publishes directories for each certification and certificate program on its website? Credential holders are sorted alphabetically by country, and then…
Update: General Audiology Board Certification Is Coming
Progress continues on the new General Audiology Board Certification (GABC) that will lead to a Board Certified Audiologist (BC-A) credential. The Development Task Force has…


