-
John Mills Ltd t/a JML Direct
A TV ad for a cleaning tool presented gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm.
-
Hing Fo International Ltd t/a ALFABAR
A poster for an electronic cigarettes brand was irresponsible for being likely to appeal particularly to under-18s, but was not inappropriately targeted.
-
LeoVegas Gaming plc t/a Bet MGM
A TV ad for Bet MGM featuring Chris Rock was not likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
Lindar Media Ltd t/a MRQ.com
A paid-for Facebook ad for gaming website MrQ.com featured cartoon imagery that was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
Volkswagen Group United Kingdom Ltd t/a Audi
A Video on Demand ad for an electric car featured misleading claims about charging time and mileage.
-
Ford Motor Company Ltd t/a Ford
A paid-for Google ad did not mislead when claiming a car had ‘zero emissions driving’.
-
BKUK Group Ltd t/a Burger King
Three emails for foods in high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) were directed at children through the media in which they appeared.
-
BMW (UK) Ltd
A paid-for Google ad misleadingly represented a vehicle’s environmental impact.
-
Greater London Authority
A radio ad about the ULEZ expansion misleadingly claimed that one of the most polluted places in London is inside people’s cars.
-
MG Motor UK Ltd
A paid-for Google ad misleadingly represented a vehicle’s environmental impact.
-
Transport For London t/a TFL
A TV ad, radio ads and a press ad for Transport for London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) expansion contained some misleading claims about reductions in levels of nitrous oxide in central London.
-
LifeSafe Technologies Ltd
Two paid-for TikTok ads misleadingly implied a fire extinguisher was suitable for all sizes and types of fires.
-
Gamehaus Network Technology Co Ltd
An in-app ad for a mobile game featuring an incestuous relationship, suggesting a child had been sexualised and groomed by an adult and portraying a child in a sexual way was likely to cause serious and widespread offence.
-
Grandbing Technology Co Ltd t/a On Fancy
A website for an online clothing retailer portrayed a child in a sexual way and was irresponsible.
-
Outsourceful Ltd t/a Outsourceful
An email and website for a recruitment agency perpetuated harmful racial stereotypes and were likely to cause serious offence.
-
E-Scooters 4 Less (unconfirmed) t/a E-Scooters 4 Less
A website for electric scooters, which suggested products could be ridden on UK roads despite legal restrictions, was misleading and irresponsible.
-
FunPlus International AG t/a Funplus
An in-app ad for a mobile game was likely to cause serious offence by trivialising and condoning sexual assault and sexual violence.
-
Marble Corporation Ltd t/a The Little Ones
A product page for a pillow irresponsibly shows an infant in an unsafe sleep position associated with Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI).
-
GIRLvsCANCER
An outdoor poster that referenced a swear word was likely to cause serious or widespread offence and was inappropriate for an untargeted medium.
-
Happytiger ApS
A TV ad for bingo featured someone who appeared to be under the age of 25.
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 (86)