-
The Sky Mining Company Ltd t/a Sky Mining
A press ad, Instagram ad and website did not make it clear that the company’s diamonds were synthetic, which was misleading.
-
Sparks Information PTE Ltd t/a Hunting Sniper
A paid-for Facebook ad for Hunting Sniper, a mobile app game, featured realistic footage of harm to animals, which was likely to cause widespread offence and unjustified distress.
-
MNG-Mango UK Ltd
A product listing for a sweater featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin.
-
Worldwide Trademarks sro t/a Worldwide Trademarks
A direct mailing was not obviously identifiable as an ad, and misleadingly had the appearance of an invoice.
-
Calvin Klein Inc
[Republished ruling] Three posters for Calvin Klein did not objectify women, but one was inappropriate for display in an untargeted medium.
-
OneCompress
Two paid-for Facebook ads for bamboo gloves and socks made medical claims for unlicensed products.
-
Lenovo Technology (UK) Ltd
An email contained the misleading claim “Get 10% off any product”.
-
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.
-
Lynne McTaggart
Two marketing emails and a website made misleading claims about alternative medicine treating medical conditions, and discouraged people seeking essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Zzoomm plc
A direct mailing misleadingly stated the savings someone could make with their broadband service.
-
Eurostar International Ltd
A promotional email that advertised trips for £39 was misleading for not having enough tickets at that price point.
-
Charles Tyrwhitt Shirts Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for Charles Tyrwhitt, a clothing retailer, seen on 28 July 2023, featured an image of a print cotton shirt. Text on the post stated “[…] We’re proud to be a Carbon Neutral business”.
-
CrypticKits
A TikTok post and Instagram post misleadingly implied that people could buy football shirts for £1
-
Shenzhen Guangming District Kangshuo E-Commerce Firm t/a Health Support Store
A paid-for ad on AliExpress was irresponsible for featuring a model that appeared unhealthily thin and made medicinal claims for an unlicensed product.
-
Whaleco UK Ltd t/a Temu
Four display ads and an in-app ad for Temu were sexually graphic and likely to cause widespread offence; sexualised someone who was a child; sexually objectified women; and were inappropriately targeted.
-
Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com
An email ad failed to administer a pricing promotion via a discount code fairly.
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 (37)