Clothing, shoes and jewellery

Helpful information on the advertising rules for products or services that relate to any type of wearable garment or accessory, and the fashion industry in general.

Ads for clothing, shoes and jewellery often come under fire for promoting unhealthy body images and causing body confidence issues by showing unrealistic body types. While this is a wider societal debate and provides challenges that regulation doesn’t hold all the answers to, we do our best to ensure ads are responsible and have banned ads that don’t encourage positive body image.

The advertising rules state that ads should be prepared with a degree of social responsibility and in fashion ads, this can mean making sure models don’t appear unhealthily thin. It’s also important in the fashion industry to make sure children are protected and we have strict rules on protecting children from sexualised images and being the object of sexualisation themselves.

Images that feature suggestive or sexualised imagery such as children in heavy make-up or provocative poses are likely to fall foul of our rules. Advertisers should be aware these rules apply to models that look under the age of 16 even if they are in fact older.

Other symbols of youth, such as school uniforms, are also almost certainly unacceptable if used in a sexual context.

Another problem area for ads relating to clothing, shoes and jewellery is hidden charges such as delivery or costs for returning goods. Advertisers, especially those whose sales are largely or exclusively via the Internet, often offer goods at prices that exclude delivery charges. This is only acceptable under the advertising rules if the customer can collect the product themselves, say from a warehouse or retail outlet.

Advertisers should also avoid using definitive claims such as "FREE DELIVERY WHEN SPENDING OVER £200" and "FREE DELIVERY ON ALL ORDERS" if additional delivery charges apply to some postcodes.

+ Read more - Show less

Latest rulings

Koi Footwear Ltd
- Upheld
- Email
- 18 June 2025
An email was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence by condoning drug use.
Diesel SpA t/a Diesel
- Upheld in part
- Website (paid ad)
- 11 June 2025
A paid-for ad featuring Katie Price was irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence by objectifying and sexualising women.
Person(s) Unknown t/a Henry’s Boots
- Upheld
- Social media (paid ad)
- 09 April 2025
A paid-for Facebook ad and website made misleading claims including that their products were handmade and that they were closing down and also failed to include the geographical address from which they operated.
Person(s) unknown t/a Luxelle-London
- Upheld
- Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
- 09 April 2025
Two paid-for Facebook ads and a website misleadingly implied they were a UK-based company and failed to include the geographical address from which they operated.

View all rulings

Clothing, shoes and jewellery

Helpful information on the advertising rules for products or services that relate to any type of wearable garment or accessory, and the fashion industry in general.

Latest news

Off with your heads! Keeping within the rules in ads that reference the royals

Sunny with a Chance of Regulation… It’s Sun Awareness Week!

The Notebook for Compliance, this Valentine’s Day

Don’t feel rattled about your baby-related ads

Frighteningly Good Ad Compliance: A Halloween How-To

Evidently, evidence is everything! Six tips on sound substantiation

Latest rulings

Koi Footwear Ltd

Diesel SpA t/a Diesel

Person(s) Unknown t/a Henry’s Boots

Person(s) unknown t/a Luxelle-London

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Social responsibility: Body image

Advice for Online Marketplace Sellers

Amber Jewellery

Relevant codes