-
HW Fantasy Ltd t/a My Passion
An in-game ad for an online romantic novel service, seen in a puzzle game was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence, including by trivialising violence against women.
-
Gorgeous Shard Puzzle Studio
An in-game ad for a mobile game app was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence, including by objectifying and sexualising women and featuring a harmful gender stereotype.
-
CTW Inc
Three paid-for YouTube ads for a video-game company were socially irresponsible, likely to cause serious or widespread offence and featured harmful gender stereotypes by objectifying and sexualising women. The ads also portrayed someone who appeared to be under 18 in a sexual way.
-
Pheon Inc
An in-game ad and a paid-for social media ad for an AI Chat Bot, portrayed the character as under-18 and was likely to cause serious or widespread offence by stereotyping women as sexual objects.
-
Glamour Shots
A paid-for Google search ad for eBay was irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence by objectifying and sexualising women.
-
Cosmos Oyun Yazilim Sanayi Ticaret Ltd Sirketi t/a Filter AI
An in-game ad was socially irresponsible and caused serious offence, including by featuring a harmful gender stereotype that objectified women.
-
Wuxi Zhan'ao E-commerce Co Ltd t/a Lpows.com
A paid-for YouTube ad featured a gender stereotype that was likely to cause harm or serious offence.
-
HOMA Games SAS
An in-game ad was socially irresponsible and caused serious or widespread offence, including by featuring a harmful stereotype by objectifying women.
-
Honeytech Ltd t/a Honeytoon
Two paid-for X ads were socially irresponsible, featured harmful gender stereotypes and caused serious or widespread offence, including referencing incest, featuring scenes that depicted women as objects of sexual gratification and trivialising sexual assault.
-
Cloud Whale Interactive Technology
An in-game ad was socially irresponsible, likely to cause serious or widespread offence and was irresponsibly targeted
-
Dawn Hazeldine t/a Stockport Counselling Services
A webpage misleadingly claimed that they were associated with the BACP and implied that they’d received training and qualifications from them when this wasn't the case.
-
Action Rehab
A website for a rehab clinic referral company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business, that they owned clinics and that they had been approved by a public body. It also failed to make clear that they received a commission for their service.
-
Addiction Recovery Systems Ltd t/a Rehab Guide
A website for a rehab clinic referral company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business and that they provided treatment directly at clinics they operated and also failed to make clear that they received a commission for their service.
-
Better Health and Wellness
A paid-for Facebook ad was misleading as it didn’t make clear the nature of the content people would be served if they engaged with the ad.
-
Health and Wellness
A paid-for Facebook ad was misleading as it didn’t make clear the nature of the content people would be served if they engaged with the ad and also exaggerated the capability of laser eye treatment.
-
Help 4 Addiction Ltd
A website for a rehab clinic referral company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business, that they provided treatment directly at clinics they operated and that a local rehab facility could be accessed using their website. It also didn’t make clear that they received commission for...
-
Marketing VF Ltd t/a The Eco Experts
A paid-for Facebook ad for a laser eye surgery referral company falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their business and that they directly provided laser eye surgery when this wasn’t the case. The ad also failed to make clear that they receive a commission for their service and misleadingly exagg...
-
Rehabs.uk
A website for a rehab clinic referral company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business and that they provided treatment directly at clinics they operated and also failed to make clear that they received a commission for their service.
-
Serenity Rehabilitation Ltd t/a Serenity Addiction Centres
A website for a rehab clinic referral company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business, that they provided treatment directly at clinics they operated and that they had been approved by a public body and also failed to make clear that they received a commission for their service.
-
UK Addiction Treatment Ltd t/a UKAT
A website for a rehab clinic referral company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business and misleadingly suggested that their service was impartial and that they offered professional counselling treatment.
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 (22)