Ad description
A website for MN2S, www.mn2s.com, a talent agency seen on 24 March 2026. The “Talent Roster” webpage featured a biography of the photographer Seph Lawless beside an image of him. Beneath the image was a button which stated, “BOOK SEPH LAWLESS”. Underneath text stated, “BOOKED BY AGENT [Name] CONTACT [Phone number] When the link was clicked, a booking enquiry form appeared. Further down the webpage, headline text stated, “FREQUENLY [sic] ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT BOOKING SEPH LAWLESS”. Text stated, “Can Seph Lawless create custom content for our campaign? Yes — Seph Lawless can deliver bespoke content (videos, posts, appearances, endorsements) aligned to your creative brief […] Does Seph Lawless do voiceovers or on-camera work? Yes — subject to concept approval and scheduling. Can Seph Lawless also participate in other types of events or campaigns? Yes — many of our talent are versatile and can engage in speaking engagement, or media/brand activations, depending on their individual skills and availability.”
Issue
Seph Lawless, who was not represented by MN2S and had no professional relationship with them, challenged whether the ad was misleading.
Response
MN2S Management Ltd t/a MN2S did not respond to the ASA’s enquiries.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA was concerned by MN2S Management Ltd’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
The ad featured a webpage headed “Talent Roster” with an image of Seph Lawless, his biography, a button to “BOOK SEPH LAWLESS”, as well as contact details for an agent. We considered that consumers would understand from the ad that Mr Lawless was represented by MN2S and was available to be booked through them for commercial work. We considered claims such as “Can Seph Lawless create custom content for our campaign? Yes” and “Does Seph Lawless do voiceovers or on-camera work? Yes”, further reinforced the impression that he had a professional relationship with MN2S and could be engaged through the talent agency for work.
We understood, however, that Seph Lawless was not represented by MN2S and had no professional or contractual relationship with them, nor had we seen evidence to demonstrate otherwise. We therefore considered that the ad’s presentation of Seph Lawless as being part of MN2S’s bookable talent when that was not the case was materially misleading.
For those reasons, we concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told MN2S Management Ltd t/a MN2S to ensure that it did not misleadingly state or imply that a person was represented by their agency and was available to be booked through them, if that was not the case. We referred the matter to CAP’s Compliance team.
