-
Alliance Winds Ltd t/a linendaily
A paid-for Meta ad and a website listing for an online clothing company misleadingly claimed they were established and owned by armed forces veterans and that they donated a share of profits to PTSD support organisations.
-
Practice Pal t/a Involve Education (Involve)
A website for a management information services software provider for schools made misleading and unverifiable comparative claims about competitors’ products.
-
WashWater UK Ltd
A brochure for a water conditioning and purifying system manufacturer misleadingly implied their water treatment systems could target and remove existing limescale, reduce hot water bills and help improve certain skin conditions.
-
persons unknown t/a Evora Official
Four paid-for Facebook ads and a website for a multi-sensory stuffed toy made unlicenced medicinal claims that weren’t backed up by robust evidence, including that the product could relieve symptoms of anxiety and insomnia. The ads also made misleading claims about testimonials and didn’t have evidence to s...
-
Activision Blizzard UK Ltd t/a Call of Duty
A Video on Demand and YouTube ad for Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence by trivialising sexual violence. Another issue was investigated but it didn’t break the rules.
-
FlyDogGame t/a Love and Peace
A paid-for ad for a mobile game app was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence, including by trivialising and condoning violence, including domestic violence.
-
Health Bridge Ltd t/a Zava
An advertorial promoting medicated weight-loss seen on the Mumsnet website didn’t make it clear it was an ad, used healthcare professionals to endorse a medicine and promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
Pocket FM Private Ltd
A paid-for in-app ad for an audiobook app was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence, including by referencing sexual assault and sexual violence.
-
Skywork AI Pte t/a Dramawave
A video ad for a streaming platform was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence, including by featuring content that was sexually explicit and suggested sexual violence.
-
Surge International Ltd
A listing seen on the job website Indeed.com made misleading claims about the starting salary of a role and failed to make clear that the role was self-employed.
-
Transport For London t/a TFL
A paid-for Facebook ad for Transport for London was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence on the grounds of race by reinforcing a negative stereotype about black men.
-
Virgin Media Ltd
A TV ad for Virgin Media didn’t provide sufficient information to enable people to verify comparisons with identifiable competitors. Another issue was investigated but it didn’t break the rules.
-
Whaleco UK Ltd t/a Temu
Two paid-for Facebook ads for Temu were misleading by contradicting the terms and conditions that applied to an advertised promotion.
-
Haikou Chengfa Technology Co Ltd t/a Aurai Ai
A paid-for YouTube ad for an AI role play app was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence, including by featuring expletives and content that condoned sexually violent behaviour.
-
On The Beach Ltd
An email for On The Beach made misleading price comparison claims and failed to make clear if people needed to act quickly to benefit from an advertised lower price. The ad also failed to make the basis of comparisons clear and didn’t provide prominent information to allow people to verify comparisons.
-
The Walt Disney Company Ltd t/a Twentieth Century Studios
An outdoor digital video poster for the film Predator Badlands was likely to cause fear and distress for young children and was displayed in a place where it could be seen by people of all ages.
-
ZING Oral Care Ltd t/a ZING Toothpaste
Three paid-for Facebook ads for ZING Toothpaste misleadingly implied they had a five-star Trustpilot rating but didn't have the evidence to back this claim up.
-
Co-operative Group t/a Co-op
A website for Co-op advertising a price-match scheme was misleading by not comparing the most appropriate products. The ad also failed to make the basis of comparisons clear and didn’t provide prominent information to allow people to verify comparisons. Two other issues were investigated but did not break the rul...
-
Criterion Hospitality Limited t/a Zedwell Hotels
A paid-for Meta ad for Zedwell Hotels didn’t make misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Kind Patches Ltd
Four paid-for Facebook ads for a supplement company misleadingly implied their products had health benefits without having suitable evidence to back these claims up.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following a formal investigation, the advertising rules apply and where we draw the line in judging whether an ad has broken the rules. We also publish a list of companies and organisations which agree to amend or withdraw their ad without being subject to a formal ruling.
Rulings (255)