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

Ashlen Inc
- Upheld
- 09 October 2024
A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly stated that a hair pin collection was being withdrawn and failed to include an end date for a promotion.
Kentesh Ltd
- Upheld
- 09 October 2024
A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly stated that a clothing collection was being withdrawn and failed to include an end date for a promotion.
Person(s) unknown t/a Goodysee
- Upheld
- 09 October 2024
A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly stated that a clothing collection was being withdrawn and failed to include an end date for a promotion.
Adidas UK Ltd
- Upheld
- Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
- 25 September 2024
An Instagram story on Tanya Burr’s account featuring affiliate links wasn’t obviously identifiable as an ad.

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

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

Top tips for responsible influencer marketing

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

Don’t pay the price for your “Free Trials” advertising

Latest rulings

Ashlen Inc

Kentesh Ltd

Person(s) unknown t/a Goodysee

Adidas UK Ltd

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Social responsibility: Body image

Weight control: Garments

Advice for Online Marketplace Sellers

Relevant codes