Three videos on the Stephen Bear YouTube channel, seen in February 2021:
a. The first video was titled “Stephen Bear gives away £10,000” with the video description stating “COMPETITION TIME !!!! [four siren emojis] DO YOU WANT TO WIN £10,000??? Here are the rules..1. Like this video 2. Subscribe to my channel 3. Guess the correct amount of kick ups in the comment section.,.Competition ends this Sunday . Winner will be announced on my YouTube channel this Sunday!!! Maybe click the notification [bell emoji] so you get notified as soon as the video goes up .. GOOD LUCK!! MY AIM THIS YEAR IS TO REACH 1,000,000 SUBSCRIBERS ON MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL. PLEASE HELP ME REACH MY GOAL.”
b. The second video was titled “STEPHEN BEAR GIVES AWAY £10,000 PART 1”. The video depicted Mr Bear in his garden with an open briefcase of bank notes. Mr Bear explained to the camera “You have got a chance to win £10,000 right now and I’ll be announcing the winner.”
c. The third video was titled “STEPHEN BEAR GIVES AWAY £10,000 PART 2!!!! REACTION IS CRAZY!!”. The video depicted Mr Bear calling the winner to tell them that they had won £10,000.
IssueThe complainant challenged whether the promotion in ads (a)-(c) was administered fairly and the prize was awarded to a genuine entrant in in accordance with the laws of chance.
ResponseStephen Bear did not respond to the ASA’s enquires.
The ASA was concerned by Stephen Bear’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay). We reminded him of his responsibility to provide a response to our enquiries and told him to do so in the future.
The CAP Code stated that promoters must award the prize as described in their marketing communications or reasonable equivalents, normally within 30 days. They must also ensure their promotions were conducted under proper supervision and they must avoid causing unnecessary disappointment. We understood that the YouTube prize draw was to win £10,000 and that, in order to enter, entrants were required to ‘like’ Stephen Bear’s YouTube video, subscribe to his YouTube channel and guess the amount of ‘kick-ups’ Mr Bear did in the video by commenting on the video. However, we did not receive any information about how the promotion had been administered, nor evidence which showed that the prize had been awarded. In the absence of that, we concluded that the promotion had not been administered fairly and was in breach of the Code.
The promotion breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code.
Promoters must conduct their promotions equitably, promptly and efficiently and be seen to deal fairly and honourably with participants and potential participants. Promoters must avoid causing unnecessary disappointment.
Promoters must ensure that their promotions are conducted under proper supervision and make adequate resources available to administer them. Promoters, agencies and intermediaries should not give consumers justifiable grounds for complaint.
Promoters must award the prizes as described in their marketing communications or reasonable equivalents, normally within 30 days.
(Administration) and 8.24 8.24 Promoters of prize draws must ensure that prizes are awarded in accordance with the laws of chance and, unless winners are selected by a computer process that produces verifiably random results, by an independent person, or under the supervision of an independent person. and 8.28.5 8.28.5 Promoters must either publish or make available information that indicates that a valid award took place – ordinarily the surname and county of major prizewinners and, if applicable, their winning entries. At or before the time of entry, promoters must inform entrants of their intention to publish or make available the information and give them the opportunity to object to their information being published or made available, or to reduce the amount of information published or made available. In such circumstances, the promoter must nevertheless still provide the information and winning entry to the ASA if challenged. The privacy of prizewinners must not be prejudiced by the publication of personal information and in limited circumstances (for example, in relation to National Savings) promoters may need to comply with a legal requirement not to publish such information.
We told Stephen Bear to ensure that he awarded prizes as described in his marketing communications and that promotions were conducted under proper supervision. We referred the matter to CAP’s Compliance team