Rulings (16)
  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Upheld
    • Television, VOD, Radio
    • 12 August 2026

    Two TV ads, Two Video on Demand ads and a radio ad for Midnite, a betting app, portrayed gambling behaviour that could lead to financial, social or emotional harm and also suggested that gambling was an escape from personal problems.

  • Videoslots Ltd t/a Mr Vegas

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 01 July 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a gambling company featured imagery that was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Argos Limited t/a Argos

    • Upheld in part
    • Magazine (commercial classified)
    • 24 June 2026

    A page in the Argos 2025 Christmas gift guide featuring the video game Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 failed to make clear that the game contained loot boxes. Another ad was investigated but it didn’t break the rules. 

  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 10 June 2026

    A TikTok post on Mia Mon’s account promoting an online betting platform didn’t feature someone who was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Gismart Ltd t/a Dancebit

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 29 April 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a dance workout app misleadingly stated that their service was free.

  • Skill on Net Ltd t/a Gecko Play

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 April 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for a gambling website portrayed, condoned and encouraged gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible and could lead to financial, social or emotional harm.

  • RTSB Ltd t/a Match Bingo

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 04 March 2026

    [Republished ruling] A YouTube ad for Match Bingo, which featured the Tottenham Hotspur Football team, wasn’t inappropriately targeted to under-18s.

  • Magic Tavern Inc

    • Upheld
    • In-game (apps)
    • 10 December 2025

    Three paid-for Meta ads for a mobile app game were socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence, including by normalising, condoning and making light of domestic violence, abusive relationships, and bullying, by objectifying women and by presenting gender stereotypes in a way that would like...

  • WHG (International) Ltd t/a William Hill Online

    • Upheld
    • App (own claim)
    • 29 October 2025

    An in-app ad promoting an offer for a game in the William Hill app misleadingly contradicted the terms and conditions that applied to the offer.

  • Betway Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 22 October 2025

    A pre-roll ad on YouTube for Betway featured the Chelsea FC logo in a manner which was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Bonne Terre Ltd t/a Sky Bet

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 22 October 2025

    [Republished ruling] A promoted tweet for Sky Bet featured Gary Neville, a person who was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Eaton Gate Gaming Ltd t/a Kwiff

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 22 October 2025

    A post on Kwiff’s X account featured Sir Lewis Hamilton, a person who was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Currys Group Ltd t/a Currys

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 24 September 2025

    A paid-for Facebook ad for Currys was misleading and socially irresponsible by implying that e-scooters could be ridden on public roads.

  • William Hill Organization Ltd t/a William Hill

    • Upheld
    • Point of sale
    • 24 September 2025

    A promotional voucher for William Hill encouraged irresponsible use.

  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 17 September 2025

    A post on Midnite’s X page featuring an AI generated video depicting footballer Trent Alexander-Arnold had strong appeal to under-18s.

  • KamaGames Ltd t/a Blackjackist

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 03 September 2025

    A paid-for X ad for the Blackjack 21: Blackjackist game misleadingly stated that the game didn’t contain in-game purchases, including random-item purchases.