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

Wild Cosmetics Ltd
- Upheld
- Internet
- 24 July 2024
A pre-roll YouTube ad for Wild deodorant misleadingly implied that there was a link between competing deodorant products and breast cancer.
Lyma Life Ltd
- Upheld
- 26 June 2024
A paid-for Instagram ad for an at home beauty device misleadingly claimed that it was the ‘world’s most powerful home beauty device’ and that it was a hundred times more effective and powerful than competitors’ devices.
Fussy Ltd
- Upheld
- 19 June 2024
Fussy Ltd: A LinkedIn and Instagram ad for Fussy deodorant discredited and denigrated a competitor's brand and products.
Hismile Pty Ltd
- Upheld
- Social media (paid ad)
- 03 April 2024
Two paid-for TikTok ads made misleading claims about the range of flavours produced and sold by the advertiser.

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

Smoothing out the wrinkles of advertising Botox

This is not a drill - dental ads wisdom

Soak up our advice to stay safe in the sun

Prescription for Compliance – POMs and the Code

Enforcement Notice issued to non-UK based cosmetic surgery providers to tackle irresponsible ads

Fake Endorsements In Ads Makes Everyone Sad: A Look At Influencer Reviews

Latest rulings

Wild Cosmetics Ltd

Lyma Life Ltd

Fussy Ltd

Hismile Pty Ltd

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Advice for Online Marketplace Sellers

Before and after photos

Social responsibility: Body image

Relevant codes

History of self-regulation