-
Shop Direct Home Shopping Ltd t/a Very, very.co.uk, Littlewoods, littlewoods.com
This ruling replaces one from November 2021; however, we have continued to uphold the complaint.
-
Tesco Mobile Ltd t/a Tesco Mobile
We banned ads for replacing expletives with food terms.
-
Transform Hospital Group Ltd t/a Transform
We banned an ad for trivialising plastic surgery.
-
UAB Ekomlita t/a nuubu
We partly upheld complaints against ads for kitchen knives.
-
Adidas UK Ltd t/a Adidas
We upheld complaints against ads containing nudity.
-
Paramount UK Partnership t/a Comedy Central, Paramount Comedy Channel
A pre-roll ad on YouTube for a Comedy Central programme was likely to cause serious offence and was irresponsibly targeted.
-
Relx (UK) Ltd
An Instagram story on Louis Shaw’s account was not obviously identifiable as an ad and promoted unlicensed, nicotine-containing e-cigarettes on social media.
-
Wild Drinks Group Ltd t/a Whisp Drinks
We banned an ad on Rosie Breen’s TikTok page for making health claims about an alcoholic product, encouraging excessive drinking and featuring someone under 25 years of age.
-
Person(s) unknown
We banned an online ad for a company claiming to be able to treat depression and other medical conditions, over unsubstantiated claims over treatments’ efficacy.
-
Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com
We upheld complaints about an online product listing for a pair of jeans, as it objectified women.
-
PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power
A radio ad for a bookmaker did not break rules on harm and offence with regards to references to emigration and sporting rivalries.
-
PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power
A radio ad for a bookmaker did not break the rules on harm and offence on the grounds of innuendo or portrayal of gender stereotypes
-
PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power
A TV and VOD ad by a bookmaker broke the rules by portraying gambling as taking priority in life over family and encouraging repetitive or frequent participation in gambling.
-
Vegan Friendly UK
A TV ad for Vegan Friendly UK was likely to cause distress to both younger and adult audiences and therefore was not suitable for broadcast on TV regardless of scheduling restrictions.
-
Ayoomi Technology Co Ltd
An in-game ad was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence for objectifying women or presenting them as stereotyped sexual objects and featuring implied non-consensual sexual acts.
-
Cellar Door Ltd t/a OrchidRomance
A paid-for YouTube ad for an online introduction agency portrayed a female model, who seemed to be under 18 years of age, in a sexual way and was therefore irresponsible.
-
GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare (UK) Trading Ltd
A TV ad for over-the-counter heartburn relief medicine was not irresponsible or harmful as I did not discourage essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought.
-
Stacey Bradley
Two local press ads, one print and one digital, misleadingly implied they had been placed, endorsed or approved by a public body and misleadingly implied COVID-19 vaccinations were unsafe and illegal. They were socially irresponsible and caused fear without justifiable reason.
-
Stephen Bear t/a Pink Panther Models
A website for an adult webcam modelling recruitment agency made misleading earnings claims and inaccurate statement about the organisation’s experience in the sector.
-
Alibaba Group Holding Limited t/a Alibaba
A website ad for an online retailer was irresponsible for portraying a female model who was under the age of 18 in a sexual way.
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 (84)