Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.

The CAP Code does not apply to the content of books or any other “editorial content”.  But it does apply to ads for books, and ads that quote or describe their content.  This advice article explains how the Code applies to ads that refer to books and other publications.

The article covers the following topics:

Objective claims in ads for books

Marketers of publications should ensure that claims about the content of publications comply with the Code. The Code contains only one rule that relates specifically to publications, in Section 3 (Misleading advertising):

3.8    Claims for the content of non-fiction publications must not mislead by exaggerating the value, accuracy, scientific validity or practical usefulness of the product. Marketers must ensure that claims that have not been independently substantiated but are based merely on the content of a publication do not mislead consumers.

Factual claims, whether direct or implied, must be substantiated. Ads for books are permitted to describe what those books are about, but the ASA holds objective claims in those ads to the same standards as any other objective claims.

Marketers may present the content of publications without necessarily being required to hold evidence for them, only if claims are presented in discursive terms that are unlikely to mislead readers or affect their subsequent behaviour. For example, the claim “The author explains why alternative therapies are more effective than conventional medicine” is unlikely to be acceptable without substantiation. However, the claim “The author discusses alternative therapies and compares them with conventional medicine” is more likely to be acceptable.

The CAP Code is likely to apply to claims that appear in ‘Product Description’ and ‘Author Bio’ sections of ads for books. In 2013, the ASA ruled that the “about the author” section on an Amazon product page was misleading and irresponsible (Amazon EU Sarl, 10 July 2013). The section described the author’s views on the dangers of vaccines and the benefits of having measles. The ASA was concerned the claims "... to educate ... on the benefits of having measles and how you can heal from them naturally and successfully" and "... history shows that in industrialized countries, these diseases are quite benign and, according to natural health sources, beneficial to the body" would be taken by consumers to be objective claims that were supported by robust evidence, and went beyond expressions of opinion. Though the ad described the author's views accurately, in the absence of substantiation the ASA concluded it was misleading and could discourage essential medical treatment (Rule 12.2).

Obvious exaggerations or untruths that are unlikely to mislead, harm or offend readers are likely to be acceptable, especially if they are presented as opinion (see guidance on ‘Puffery and expressions of opinion’). Terms likely to be acceptable as indicating opinion are claims such as “The author believes/ argues/ debates/ questions/ ponders/ speculates/ hypothesises/ theorises/ thinks/ postulates/ considers/ discusses/ disputes …”. Less obviously speculative terms such as “investigates / analyses / examines” may be used only if the claims are obviously speculative in content and context.

Unproven claims that are capable of objective substantiation must not be featured even when expressed as an opinion or in the form of a direct quote. An ad may describe the content of the publication in discursive terms, but marketers must not simply preface unproven claims with “we believe” or similar. Such statements are considered to go beyond the scope of subjective opinion and would be subject to the Code's requirements for substantiation (Rule 3.7).

Product titles and business names

Claims that appear in product titles may be exempt from the requirements of rule 3.8 if:

  • it's clear that they are presented as the name of the product,
  • they are followed by the author’s name, and
  • the claims are not repeated or reinforced elsewhere in the ad.

If the business name of the marketer advertising a publication implies efficacy (for example “The Natural Arthritis Cure Company”) and the business name is not a registered trademark, the marketer must change it. If it is trademarked, the name must be linked clearly to a footnote stating that the efficacy of the services provided by the marketer has not been proven.

Additionally, marketers must not misleadingly describe pamphlets and the like as “books”. Books have an International Book Standard number (ISBN) and are registered with the British Library.

See CAP’s advice on Claims in product names.  

Medical conditions

Ads for books must not offer specific advice on, diagnosis of or treatment for conditions for which medical attention should be sought (Rule 12.2), even if they include a disclaimer referring readers to suitably qualified health professionals.

Ads that refer to conditions for which medical attention should be sought should do so only in general discursive terms. Marketers must not offer an opinion on the efficacy or potential negative effects of conventional surgery or medicines in ads, if that opinion could discourage people from seeking treatment by conventional methods.

Using books to substantiate claims

The ASA requires advertisers to support their claims with robust evidence and methodologies. The fact that claims appeared in a book is no guarantee that the ASA will consider them reliable.

When the ASA investigated claims about a therapy called cryotherapy, the advertisers submitted extracts from a book as supporting evidence. The ASA assessed this material, but concluded that it didn’t support the advertisers’ claims, which would have needed to be supported by randomised controlled clinical studies. (Cryojuvenate UK Ltd, 18 April 2018).

See further advice on Substantiation, and the CAP Guidance on the level of substantiation expected in health, beauty and slimming claims.  

Downloadable online content

The content of downloadable books, comics and audio books can sometimes count as advertising.  This is if their content is directly connected to products or services that the advertisers offer (see the Scope of the Code).

In 2018, the ASA investigated complaints about a downloadable storybook produced by Cadbury which included images of Easter eggs and a branded message. (Mondelez UK Ltd, 04 July 2018). The ASA also investigated a downloadable comic book and audio book featuring “Freddo the Frog”, which were published by the manufacturer of Freddo chocolate bars (Mondelez UK Ltd, 06 March 2019). In both cases, the ads breached the Code because they promoted products that were ‘high in fat, salt or sugar’ (HFSS), and had the effect of promoting these products to children.

Also see: HFSS: Product and Brand Advertising. 

Recognising social media ads for books

When people refer to their own books in social media posts, these posts are likely to count as ads. This is because they have a commercial interest in selling the book they've referred to.

When Mylene Klass published an Instagram reel that showed images of her book, the ASA investigated complaints that it wasn’t obviously identifiable as an ad. Because the video didn’t contain a label that made this clear, and opened with shots of various celebrities answering questions, the ASA ruled that the ad didn’t make this adequately clear. (Myleene Klass, 02 November 2022).

Also see: Remit: social media and Recognising ads: Social media and influencer marketing. 

Harm and offence

Marketers must not use headlines or claims that are likely to exploit or frighten vulnerable people. Ads must also not contain anything likely to cause serious or widespread offence (Rule 4.1), nor cause fear or distress without justifiable reason (Rule 4.2).

If an ad refers to something from a book, consumers may not recognise the reference and could interpret claims in unintended ways.  Advertisers should consider how people who aren’t familiar with the book could interpret these references. 

The ASA investigated an ad for a freelancing platform that said "YOU DO THE GIRL BOSS THING. WE'LL DO THE SEO THING". Complainants believed that it depicted a woman running a business in a patronising way, and perpetuated harmful gender stereotypes. The advertisers stated that the term “girl boss” was a reference to a popular book about a female entrepreneur, and was not intended to be patronising or reductive.  But the ASA considered that many people who saw the ad would not be familiar with the reference, and would take it to mean that a female “boss” was an exception to the norm. Because of this, they concluded that the ad reinforced harmful gender stereotypes. (PeoplePerHour, 08 January 2020).

Further guidance can be found on: Harm and offence: Gender stereotypes.

Vanity Publishing

Vanity publishing, also described (often inaccurately) as "subsidy", "joint-venture", "shared responsibility" or even "self" publishing, is a service whereby authors are charged to have their work published. Vanity publishers generally offer to publish a book for a specific fee, or to include short stories, poems or other literary or artistic material in an anthology, which the authors are then invited to buy.

The CAP Code prohibits advertisers from materially misleading consumers and requires that evidence is held to substantiate claims made in marketing communications (Rules 3.1 and 3.7). Marketers should be mindful of the following:

Merit

Unlike publishing houses, which reject many more manuscripts than they publish, some vanity publishers print work regardless of quality. Ads should not give the impression that they, or an independent reviewer, will judge whether an author’s work warrants publication if no such vetting process or evaluation occurs. In order to claim that work is considered on merit, marketers should be able to provide documentary evidence that shows there is an element of selection, and that a significant number of the manuscripts submitted are rejected. They should also provide a list of the contact details of all the people who have submitted manuscripts over a reasonable period.

Costs

Vanity publishers rarely share production costs with the author. If they claim that they do, marketers should be able to provide evidence, such as invoices or similar, showing that they contribute to authors’ costs. The nature and extent of all costs to be borne by the author should be transparent in follow-up material.

Financial gain

It is rarely possible for authors to recoup their costs or gain financially from book sales. Before making claims that this is the case, marketers should be able to provide documentary evidence demonstrating that a reasonable number of authors have benefited as claimed. If referring to specific examples of financial success, ads should make clear that this is exceptional and that few authors recoup the cost of their outlay.

Marketing and promotion

If vanity publishers claim that they, or an associated marketing organisation, market an author's books in a way that increases sales, they may be required to hold evidence showing that a reasonable number of authors have benefited from increased book sales due to their marketing.

In 2014, the ASA ruled against an ad for a vanity publisher which stated "INNOVATIVE PROMOTION ... Not only will be [sic] pushing our retail partners to feature your book, but we'll introduce your book to potential readers in other ways. We offer radio ads ... Below are two examples of ads that have recently aired".  Because these ‘ads’ on the website were simply examples of work the advertiser believed they were capable of producing, rather than genuine ads for authors that had aired, the ASA ruled the ad was misleading (Green Shore Publishing, 8 October 2014).

More on