-
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.
-
Nationwide Building Society t/a Nationwide
TV, radio and press ads for Nationwide were misleading as consumers were likely to understand that the building society had made a long-term decision not to close their branches and that they had not recently closed any branches when this was not the case.
-
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.
-
Vytaliving Ltd
A press ad for nutritional tablets claimed a food could treat, prevent or cure human disease, featured claims that were not authorised on the GB NHC Register, and made misleading claims around savings.
-
Aldi Stores Ltd t/a Aldi
A wrap around national press ad made misleading comparative claims which could not be verified, as well as a misleading claim about prices compared to last year.
-
MNG-Mango UK Ltd
A product listing for a sweater featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin.
-
6G Internet Ltd t/a 6Gi
A leaflet for a home broadband provider made misleading claims about providing full fibre broadband.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Ben's Gutters Ltd
Four leaflets, from Ben’s Gutters, presented in the form of a compliment slip: a. The first leaflet from Ben’s Gutters Ltd, was delivered to homes in Powys, Carmarthenshire, Kent and Warwickshire in July 2023. Text which appeared to be handwritten stated “Hello, We are cleaning gutters in your area...
-
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”.
-
Equinor ASA
A national press ad for energy company Equinor, seen in June 2023, stated “Wind, oil, gas, carbon capture […]” and “IT’S ALL PART OF THE BROADER ENERGY PICTURE”. A footnote at the bottom of the ad stated “Equinor has been delivering energy solutions to the UK for 40 years, and...
-
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.
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 (47)