Beauty products, grooming and hygiene

Helpful information on the advertising rules for beauty, grooming and hygiene products, and examples of previous Advertising Standards Authority rulings in this area.

Over the years, demand for glitzy products and procedures designed to help us look younger, healthier and more beautiful, has created a multi-million pound industry. But this industry is competitive and it is one that plays heavily on aesthetic appeal to promote its products. While there’s nothing wrong with painting a positive picture, there is a line to be drawn to ensure that ads don’t over-exaggerate the benefits that a beauty, grooming or hygiene product can have. That’s why we have strict rules in place to protect consumers from potentially misleading or socially irresponsible ads for beauty products.

The main areas of complaint we see for ads for beauty, grooming and hygiene products are around the use of post-production techniques and whether advertisers can prove the claims they are making.

Like all ads, advertisers marketing beauty, grooming and hygiene products must be able to provide evidence for any claims they are making in their ads about the efficacy of their product. This includes claims like “65% reduction in the appearance of wrinkles”, “8/10 women agreed their skin looked smoother” and “The UK’s number one shampoo for coloured hair.”

Whilst our rules do allow for the use of airbrushing and other post-production techniques, advertisers should make clear that these techniques have been used through the use of superimposed qualifications or disclaimers, and they should not be used to such an extent that they exaggerate the capabilities of the product. Similarly, the use of “before” and “after” pictures are allowed but not if post-production techniques were only used on the “after” picture.

+ Read more - Show less

Latest rulings

Best Direct (International) Ltd t/a Best Direct
- Upheld
- Television
- 12 January 2022
A teleshopping presentation advertising beauty products was banned for making misleading claims about the company’s refund policy.
Charlotte Dawson t/a charlottedawsy
- Upheld
- Social media (own site)
- 22 December 2021
An Instagram reel by Charlotte Dawson was banned for not being obviously identifiable as an ad.
Jamie Genevieve
- Upheld
- Social media (own site)
- 22 December 2021
An Instagram post by Jamie Genevieve was banned for not being obviously identifiable as an ad.
The Belvedere Clinic Ltd
- Upheld
- Social media (own site)
- 01 December 2021
An Instagram post promoting a health clinic was banned for irresponsibly advertising an offer for cosmetic surgery limited to the first 50 applicants, which created an undue sense of urgency for consumers.

View all rulings

Beauty products, grooming and hygiene

Helpful information on the advertising rules for beauty, grooming and hygiene products, and examples of previous Advertising Standards Authority rulings in this area.

Latest news

An insight into our 2021 Insight articles

Taking care with the Ad Codes during Self Care Week 2021

Strict new rules for ads for cosmetic interventions

Ensure your ads are picture perfect on World Photography Day

How to #boss multi-level-marketing ads with these top tips

Brush up on your dental ads

Latest rulings

Best Direct (International) Ltd t/a Best Direct

Charlotte Dawson t/a charlottedawsy

Jamie Genevieve

The Belvedere Clinic Ltd

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Enforcement Notice: Advertising Botox and other botulinum toxin injections on social media

Multi-Level Marketing

Social responsibility: Body image

Relevant codes