Publishing

Various advertising material published on the Influencer’s Instagram account for their own podcast entitled “Life Lessons with …” contained snippets of information on the content of the podcasts alongside various ways to subscribe to them. Some of the methods to subscribe were indicated as follows:

“…(link) Click the membership to join”.
“…(link) Join the community”.
“Choose your membership {LIMITED SPACES} The Early Adopters €1.99/month (plus VAT) SOLD OUT…} All the benefits of the Hype Girlos (€3.99/pm) for the first 50 people to join the community!
The Supportive Girlos €2.49/month (plus VAT) Join…”
“…If you’re thinking of signing up you can click that link too👉”
“…(link) Listen here”.
“…(link)Watch here…Patreon.com.”
“…Now available on Spotify.”
“… Link in my Bio to subscribe.”
“…Link to Patreon.”
“…Sign up to my Patreon now for only €2.49.”

The complainant said the marketing communications had not been identified as advertising material, and there had been no indication on the part of the Influencer that the podcasts related to their ‘own brand’.

The influencer’s agency responded on their behalf and said they wished to acknowledge and sincerely apologised for the oversight which had occurred. They said the Influencer fully understood the importance of transparency and the need to declare content as an advertisement, particularly when promoting their own Podcast which was behind a Patreon paywall. Unfortunately, in this instance, they said the #AD Own Brand disclosure had been mistakenly omitted.

In conclusion the agency said the Influencer was committed to adhering strictly to all ASA guidelines moving forward and had taken steps to ensure that all future content related to their own business was clearly and correctly labelled as #AD Own Brand.

Complaint Upheld.

The Complaints Council considered the detail of the complaint, and the response received from the influencer’s agency.

The Council noted the Code requirements that marketing communications should be clear that they are marketing communications (3.31) and should not misrepresent their true purpose such as being presented as user-generated content (3.32). They also noted the joint guidance published by the Advertising Standards Authority and the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) on disclosing advertising content, which provided that advertising content should have one of three primary labels as a disclosure; #AD, a platform provided tool or #Gifted. They also noted that a secondary label could be used in addition to (and following) the primary label such as in this case #OwnBrand.

The Council noted that the advertising content in this case had not been identified correctly as advertising material. They concluded, therefore, that the lack of disclosure resulted in the advertising being likely to mislead consumers about the nature of the content and considered it to be in breach of Sections 3.31, 3.32, 4.1, and 4.4 of the Code.


ACTION REQUIRED:
The advertising material should not appear in the same format again.