Rulings (38)
  • Global Brands Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 02 September 2020

    An Instagram post promoting a VK drink did not inappropriately target children.

  • ContextLogic Inc t/a Wish.com

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad), Game (mobile/app)
    • 29 July 2020

    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.

  • LC International Limited t/a Coral

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 03 June 2020

    A tweet on a gambling company’s Twitter feed broke the rules by presenting a promotion in a way that was likely to encourage potentially harmful gambling behaviour.

  • LC International Ltd t/a Ladbrokes

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 03 June 2020

    A TV ad for a gambling company did not break the rules on encouraging gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible or portray gambling as indispensable.

  • Mizkan Euro Ltd t/a Branston

    • Not upheld
    • Poster
    • 13 May 2020

    A poster ad for vinegar did not condone or encourage poor nutritional habits or an unhealthy lifestyle in children.

  • Hey Habito Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television, Video on demand
    • 22 April 2020

    A TV and VOD ad for an online mortgage broker featuring cartoon gory horror was scheduled appropriately to prevent it from likely being seen by young children.

  • ITV Broadcasting Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 22 April 2020

    A TV ad for a film was not scheduled inappropriately as children made up only a small proportion of the audience and it was not directed at or likely to be of particular appeal to them.

  • ITV Broadcasting Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 08 April 2020

    Two TV ads for a video game were not scheduled inappropriately.

  • Sky UK Ltd t/a Sky, NowTV

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 08 April 2020

    TV ads for a video game and a film were not scheduled inappropriately.

  • kidsfitnesstrackers

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 01 April 2020

    A product listing on a website for a children’s fitbit made misleading savings claims.

  • Warner Bros. Entertainment UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Other
    • 11 March 2020

    An ad on the Classic Lullabies playlist on Spotify for the film It Chapter Two was irresponsible for causing distress for children.

  • Missguided Ltd

    • Upheld in part
    • Poster
    • 04 March 2020

    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.

  • Hey Habito Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Magazine
    • 29 January 2020

    A print ad for a mortgage broker did not break the rules around harm and offence.

  • Bacardi Global Brands Ltd t/a Bombay Sapphire Gin

    • Not upheld
    • Video on demand, Cinema
    • 08 January 2020

    A VOD and cinema ad for gin did not break the rules around implying alcohol was capable of changing mood or enhancing creativity.

  • Betway Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Video
    • 08 January 2020

    A YouTube ad for a gambling company broke the rules for featuring an individual who was under the age of 25.

  • Missguided Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 08 January 2020

    A TV ad for a clothing company did not encourage irresponsible drinking.  

  • Nicoventures Retail (UK) Ltd t/a Vype

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 08 January 2020

    Web and YouTube ads were banned for promoting unlicensed nicotine-containing e-cigarettes or e-liquids.

  • People Per Hour Ltd t/a PeoplePerHour

    • Upheld
    • 08 January 2020

    A poster ad was banned for perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes.

  • Person(s) unknown t/a The Folly Bar

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 08 January 2020

    An ad seen on Facebook was banned for promoting or condoning excessive alcohol consumption.

  • Ama Vape Lab Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 18 December 2019

    An Instagram post for an e-cigarette retailer was banned for promoting nicotine-containing e-cigarettes and their components in non-permitted media, and for featuring people who are or seem to be under 25 using e-cigarettes.

Informally resolved (2)
  • Lifecycle Marketing - unconfirmed

    • 04 December 2019
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Media: Internet (sales promotion)
    Topic: Children and the vulnerable

  • Person(s) unknown

    • 04 December 2019
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Media: Internet (on own site)
    Topic: Gender, sex and relationships