-
Edrington-Beam Suntory UK
A TV ad for whisky did not link alcohol with sexual activity and did not breach the BCAP Code.
-
Manuka Doctor (UK) Ltd
A newspaper ad for a brand of honey was banned for implying that it could be used as a treatment for coughs and for implying that its “anti-microbial” properties could treat diseases.
-
Lidl Great Britain Ltd
Two leaflets, a website, and two newspaper ads for Lidl products were banned for quoting unsubstantiated RRP claims.
-
SCA Investments Ltd t/a Gousto
A website ad for the meal subscription service Gousto misleadingly stated that their packaging was 100% plastic free and misleadingly stated that it was 100% recyclable.
-
BrewDog plc
Poster and press ads for BrewDog beer broke the rules on offence by using a reference to an expletive in media targeted to a general audience. The same ad appearing in targeted magazines did not break the rules.
-
Rightmove Group Ltd t/a Rightmove
A TV ad did not depict gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm.
-
Missguided Ltd
Two posters sold by Missguidied were not found to be offensive or irresponsible.
-
Marlow Foods Ltd t/a Quorn Foods
A TV ad for a Quorn product was banned for misleadingly implying that it helped reduce consumers’ carbon footprint.
-
Lingscars.com Ltd
A Facebook post advertising a car leasing company was banned for being socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence on the grounds of race.
-
Beer52 Ltd
A website ad for a beer subscription service made misleading claims about a discount offer.
-
Global Brands Ltd
An Instagram post promoting a VK drink did not inappropriately target children.
-
ContextLogic Inc t/a Wish.com
Four in-app ads for the e-commerce platform Wish were banned for placing explicit sexual images in apps that were likely to be used by children.
-
Not Guilty Food Co Ltd t/a The Skinny Food Co
A paid social media ad and a website for Skinny Sauce products made nutrition claims that implied they were calorie-free or energy free when they did not meet the conditions of use for the claims.
-
Revival Drinks Ltd t/a Revival Shots
A Facebook ad and two Instagram ads for Revival Shots broke the ad rules by implying that their food product could prevent, treat or cure human disease and for making health claims that were not listed as authorised on the EU Register of nutrition and health claims.
-
Chuckling Goat Ltd
A poster ad and website claims by a food provider broke the rules by implying its products prevented, treated or cured human disease.
-
Mizkan Euro Ltd t/a Branston
A poster ad for vinegar did not condone or encourage poor nutritional habits or an unhealthy lifestyle in children.
-
Iceland Foods Ltd t/a Iceland
A national press ad for a supermarket did not make a misleading price comparison.
-
BKUK Group Ltd t/a Burger King
Ads in social media for a plant-based burger misleadingly implied that the product was suitable for vegans and vegetarians.
-
Missguided Ltd
A poster by a fashion brand objectified women and was likely to cause offence while another was unlikely to break the rules on the same grounds.
-
Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com
An ad on YouTube for a clothing retailer was banned for objectifying women.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following 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, following receipt of a complaint, agreed to amend or withdraw their ad without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (22)