Cookies policy statement
We are using cookies on our site to provide you with the best user experience.
Disabling cookies may prevent our website from working efficiently. Click ok to remove this message (we will remember your choice).
OK

ASA Adjudication on Global Social Entertainment

Global Social Entertainment


Date:

24 November 2010

Media:

Regional press

Sector:

Leisure

Number of complaints:

1

Complaint Ref:

135816

Ad

A regional press ad, for a company offering work in the adult film industry, stated "EARN BETWEEN £12,000 & £15,000 OTE IN THE NEXT 3 MONTHS. Men & Women needed to appear in adult movies. Immediate start. Call now to avoid disappointment. 0871 XXX XXX / 0871 XXX XXXX. 10 am to 10 pm. www.gseuk.com".

Issue

A reader, who had responded to the ad, challenged whether:

1. the claim "immediate start" was misleading and could be substantiated.

The ASA challenged whether:

2. the ad did not set out Global Social Entertainment's full name and contact details and the fact it was an employment agency, as required by the Code; and

3. the ad did not make clear that obtaining work through the advertisers would involve significant financial outlay.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Global Social Entertainment (GSE) said that they had work available immediately, and that many respondents started working on the same day they responded to the ad. They explained all respondents were advised that, although they had work available, work was awarded via a selection process where their clients could choose a respondent from their online brochure, which had detailed information about each respondent.

2. GSE said they were not an employment agency. GSE acknowledged that the ad did not contain their postal address but they pointed out that it contained their telephone number and website address. They said that their website provided their full postal address, contact numbers and e-mail addresses. They explained that to include all of their contact details in an ad would mean they would need to take out a larger ad, which would incur a greater cost to them. They added that costs were very relevant in sustaining and running a profitable company.

3. GSE acknowledged that the ad did not make clear that a financial outlay would be required, but they explained that a small financial outlay was needed. They said that that outlay was used for marketing and advertising the respondent and they made no profit on that fee. They explained that their profit came from the commission paid by the end user, for example production companies, bookers and other agencies, who used their services.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted that GSE said many respondents had received work the same day they had responded to the ad. However, we also noted that we had not seen documentary evidence to support that claim. In the absence of any evidence, we considered that GSE had not substantiated the claim that they had work available immediately, and we therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.

2. Upheld

We understood that GSE was an agency that provided opportunities for people to act in adult movies; GSE would promote and advertise the respondents as available for work to their clients. The ASA understood that an employment agency was defined by legislation, at the time the ad appeared, as an organisation providing services, whether by the provision of information or otherwise, for the purpose of finding people employment with employers. We considered that by that definition GSE was an employment agency. We understood that the CAP Code required such organisations to make clear in an ad that they were an employment agency, if the name did not disclose that fact. Because the ad did not make clear that GSE was an employment agency or detail the company's full name and contact details, as required by the CAP Code, we concluded the ad breached the Code on those grounds.

3. Upheld

We understood from both the complainant and GSE that a financial outlay was required by those responding to the ad. We noted that that outlay would be used to promote and advertise respondents in GSEs online brochure, which was used by their clients. We considered that, because the ad did not make that expense clear, it was misleading.

The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 11) clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness), 52.2 and 52.3 (Employment and business opportunities).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)

Making a complaint

Find out what types of ads we deal with and how to make a complaint.

How to complain

Adjudications

View our latest weekly ASA adjudications or search for rulings from the last five years.

Adjudications

Non-compliant online advertisers

Check the list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Non-compliant online advertisers

Sign up

Sign up for adjudications alerts and newsletters.

Sign up

Already registered? Log in

Follow Us

For ASA news, including our weekly rulings, press releases, research and reports.
ASA_UK

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

We work hard to ensure our complaints procedures are transparent. Here we answer some commonly asked questions about how we handle complaints.

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London WC1V 6QT  |  Copyright © 2012 ASA