-
Spectrum Awakening
A paid-for Facebook ad for Spectrum Awakening, a food supplement supplier, seen in March 2024 featured text that stated, "My 5 yr old son Scout is diagnosed with receptive expressive language disorder and sensory disorder. Until I found Spectrum Awakening he could barely put a sentence together with very limited s...
-
Alzheimer's Society
Three TV ads and a radio ad for a charity were not irresponsible, did not cause serious or widespread offence, and did not cause unjustifiable distress.
-
iVape London Ltd
An email broke the rules by directly promoting to consumers unlicensed nicotine-containing e-cigarettes and their components.
-
Sparks Information PTE Ltd t/a Hunting Sniper
A paid-for Facebook ad for Hunting Sniper, a mobile app game, featured realistic footage of harm to animals, which was likely to cause widespread offence and unjustified distress.
-
Gamehaus Network Technology Co Ltd
An in-app ad for a mobile game featuring an incestuous relationship, suggesting a child had been sexualised and groomed by an adult and portraying a child in a sexual way was likely to cause serious and widespread offence.
-
FunPlus International AG t/a Funplus
An in-app ad for a mobile game was likely to cause serious offence by trivialising and condoning sexual assault and sexual violence.
-
Shenzhen Guangming District Kangshuo E-Commerce Firm t/a Health Support Store
A paid-for ad on AliExpress was irresponsible for featuring a model that appeared unhealthily thin and made medicinal claims for an unlicensed product.
-
Alibaba.com Singapore E-commerce Private Ltd t/a Alibaba.com
A paid-for ad on a newspaper website portrayed a child in a sexualised way and was harmful and socially irresponsible.
-
OrganicSupplies GB
A product listing for a B12 vitamin injection kit promoted a prescription-only medicine (POM) to the public.
-
Mitu Inc Ltd
A paid-for ad for an adult video chat app portrayed someone who seemed to be under 18 years of age in a sexual way.
-
Wuka Ltd t/a WUKA
A TV ad and Video on Demand (VOD) ad for a period underwear company was not offensive and was unlikely to cause distress.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following investigation, the advertising rules apply and where we draw the line in judging whether an ad has broken the rules. We also publish a list of companies and organisations which, following receipt of a complaint, agreed to amend or withdraw their ad without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (11)