Types of claims: General

Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.

Some types of claims are commonly used in advertising. When assessing claims, the ASA will consider the claim in the context of the ad in which it appears. Many types of claims can have different meanings, and the same claim may be interpreted differently depending on the context it appears in. The ASA will consider an ad from the consumer’s perspective, so marketers should take care to consider how consumers are likely to interpret a claim, so they do not unintentionally mislead.

Marketers should ensure that they hold evidence to support all claims that are likely to be interpreted objectively (rule 3.7) and must ensure that objective comparisons do not mislead (rule 3.33). In the absence of sufficient evidence, the ASA is likely to consider objective claims to be misleading. The substantiation likely required by the ASA will depend on the type of claim and the surrounding context.

Some claims will be interpreted as expressions of subjective opinion. Obvious exaggerations (“puffery”) and claims the average consumer is unlikely to take literally are permitted provided they are not likely to materially mislead. If the ASA considers a claim to be objective and capable of substantiation, they are likely to deem the claim to be misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation, even if the marketer’s intended to make a subjective claim.

Some claims will be interpreted as comparisons with the advertiser’s competitors, either with specific competitors (or their products), the whole market, or with unidentifiable competitors. Specific rules apply to such claims.

Below are links to further guidance to assist marketers with distinguishing between objective and subjective claims, determining whether a claim is likely to be considered comparative, and understanding the type of evidence which may be needed in respect of a particular claim. Because context is so important to the interpretation of a claim, the advice linked below should be viewed as a guide, rather than a definitive answer, as to how similar claims may be interpreted, and the level of evidence, if any, needed to support them.