The Ethical Marketing Campaign for Addiction Treatment (EMCAT) brought to the ASA’s attention concerns about the transparency and clarity in the drug and alcohol rehabilitation referral market. Upon investigating this sector, they unpicked issues in ads that were likely to mislead and could affect particularly vulnerable consumers and their families.
Across December 2024 and January 2025, the ASA published eight rulings and here we’re going to provide useful tips for advertisers, to ensure your advertising is compliant.
Do what you say
Many of these referral websites gave the impression that they offered rehabilitation services, directly, when this was not the case. The ASA judged that claims such as “we provide professional alcohol and drug addiction treatment” and “our rehabilitation centre”, were likely to lead consumers to wrongly believe they were looking at an ad for a direct treatment provider.
Falsely claiming or implying a marketer is acting for purposes outside of their business is a breach of rule 2.3, so be clear about what you offer directly, and when you are referring consumers to third parties.
Make clear the commercial intent
In this ruling (Addiction Recovery Systems Ltd t/a Rehab Guide) the ASA considered that an advertiser which received commission for placements via referrals failed to make their commercial intent clear.
Advertisers are reminded not to muddy the waters when it comes to paid referrals, and to ensure that commercial intent is clear, in any industry where there is scope for consumer confusion.
Be honest about who you are
This ruling (UK Addiction Treatment Ltd t/a UKAT) was one example of where the ASA judged that the advertiser failed to make clear that their website was primarily a referral service for facilities operated by the same parent company. This information, while available on the website, was not immediately clear to consumers.
By giving the impression that the website gave an impartial service, the ad was judged to have failed to make their commercial intent clear, and breached rule 2.3.
Logo-no-go?
Code rules 3.50 and 3.51 provide the rules for marketers regarding the use of logos and endorsements, to ensure advertisers don’t misleadingly imply that their product or service has the approval of an organisation.
Implied endorsement can be as simple as including official bodies’ logos or names in your ad, such as in this ruling (Action Rehab) which included the CQC (Care Quality Commission) trust mark. The ASA concluded that consumers would understand the inclusion of this logo to imply that the advertiser was regulated by the CQC, which it was not, so they upheld a complaint on the use of their image.
Make sure you’ve got permission that can be verified before implying an endorsement.
Don’t mislead with your messaging
In this ruling (Help 4 addiction Ltd) the ASA assessed an ad that listed links to regions in the UK and abroad that implied access to rehabilitation centres. As they did not provide direct access to clinics in all the listed regions, it was ruled under rule 3.1 that this was likely to mislead consumers.
Whilst advertisers may believe they are being useful in providing local information to consumers, it’s important to avoid implying to consumers that you serve a region, if that is not the case.
Need advice?
For further advice and guidance on non-broadcast ads, the Copy Advice team are always happy to help.
More on
-
Keep up to date
Sign up to our rulings, newsletters and emargoed access for Press. Subscribe now.
