-
Betway Ltd
A pre-roll ad on YouTube for Betway featuring the Chelsea FC logo was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
Bonne Terre Ltd t/a Sky Bet
[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
A post on Kwiff’s X account featured Sir Lewis Hamilton, a person who was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
William Hill Organization Ltd t/a William Hill
A promotional voucher for William Hill encouraged irresponsible use.
-
Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite
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
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.
-
SP Graham Retail Ltd
A voucher for Sean Graham bookmakers didn’t include all the significant conditions of the promotion and also failed to administer the promotion fairly.
-
Amazing Giveaways Ltd
A Facebook post for a prize draw wasn't administered fairly and caused unnecessary disappointment.
-
Hollywoodbets International UK Ltd t/a Hollywoodbets
A banner ad for Hollywood bets seen on the Virtual Football League website was inappropriately targeted to under-18s.
-
Mecca Bingo Ltd
A Facebook post featuring emojis for a game to guess film names, wasn't likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
Play’n GO Malta Ltd
Three banner ads promoting casino gaming content were likely to have strong appeal to under-18s and were therefore irresponsible.
-
Buzz Group Ltd
A post on Buzz Bingo Grimsby’s Facebook page featuring a cartoon action figure wasn’t likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
LEBOM Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad and a paid-for X ad encouraged gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible and encouraged excessive drinking.
-
Wowcher Ltd
A website failed to administer a promotion fairly and caused unnecessary disappointment.
-
LC International Ltd t/a Ladbrokes
A TV and Video on Demand ad featured content that was reflective of youth culture and was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
LiveScore Betting & Gaming (Gibraltar) Ltd t/a LiveScore Bet
Two in-app ads seen on the LiveScore app were inappropriately targeted towards under-18s.
-
Whaleco UK Ltd t/a Temu
An in-game ad was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.
-
Fitzdares Ltd
A post on ex-England cricketer, Stuart Broad’s X page promoting a bookmaker did not break our gambling rules as he was not likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
Groupe SEB UK Ltd t/a Tefal
A website product page for a set of pans misleadingly implied that a discount offer could be used for particular products when that was not the case.
-
Stars Interactive Ltd t/a PokerStars
An Instagram ad portrayed gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible by trivialising gambling, encouraging repetitive participation and describing gambling as an investment.
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 (27)