Advertisment
Sponsored social media posts appeared on two media outlets on behalf of LottoGo promoting various lottery draws available to Irish consumers.
Post 1 – media 1:
A sponsored post on the media outlets Facebook page stated:
“(Logo) [media] with LottoGo.com
Paid Partnership
You won’t find this offer in the shops.
Tonight’s EuroMillions is a massive €70 MILLION – grab 20 bets for just €2*”
The post featured an image of a couple with a bottle of champagne and the interior of a property. Text was included on the bottom of the image which stated:
“*18+. Each bet is a 1/50th share. LottoGo.com T&C’s apply.”
When viewing the post while logged into Facebook the “paid partnership” notification was visible.
Post 2 – media 1:
A sponsored post on a media outlet’s Facebook page stated:
“(Logo) [media] with LottoGo.com
Sponsored
Could we see our first Irish Super Jackpot winner this week?
Punters rush to grab bets on Tonight’s massive €348 MILLION* Super Jackpot.”
The post featured an image of a speed boat and included the text:
“*18+. Deductions and LottoGo.com T&C’s apply. Bet on the outcome.”
Post 3 – media 2:
A sponsored post on a media outlet’s Facebook page stated:
“(Logo) [media] with LottoGo.com
Sponsored
Fancy your chances?
You could turn €1.80 into €1,000 a day for 20 years* with a bet on tonight’s Cash4Life!”
The post featured an image of a couple on holiday and included the following text:
“18+. LottoGo.com T&C’s apply. Bet on the outcome.”
Post 4 – media 1:
A sponsored post on the media outlet’s Facebook page stated:
“(Logo) [media] with LottoGo.com
Sponsored
It’s one of the biggest jackpots in the world right now
Irish punters rush to grab bets on Tonight’s sensational €348 million* Super Jackpot”
The post featured an image of a yacht and included the following text:
“*18+. Deductions & LottoGo.com T&C’s apply. Bet on world’s biggest jackpots”
Complaint
Two complaints were received against the various posts and the complainants raised the following issues:
Issue 1:
One complainant objected to Post 1 on the grounds that it had not included a responsibility message and a direction to a source of information about gambling and gambling responsibly.
Issue 2:
One complainant objected to Post 2, Post 3 and Post 4 on the grounds that the posts appeared to be news content when in fact they were advertisements.
Issue 3:
One complainant objected to Post 2, Post 3 and Post 4 on the grounds that the posts could be accessed by any demographic on the social media site.
Response
A response was received from the advertisers and the two media outlets involved:
Issue 1 – Post 1 (Media 1):
The advertisers said that the post advertisement clicked through to the full advertorial article on the media’s website and that the article had included information in the footer that stated:
“LottoGo.com is licensed by the Irish National Excise Licence Office for Irish customers (For full details of LottoGo.com’s Regulatory Body, please see T&C’s) and has more than 1,000,000 players. Gamble Responsibly. www.gambleaware.ie”
The advertisers said that they considered that this message fulfilled the requirement for marketing communications to contain a message encouraging responsible gambling and directing people to a source of information about gambling responsibly.
The media were also asked to provide their comments on the matter:
They stated that while the article to which the social post linked to had contained the responsibility message and a link to a gambling awareness website, they agreed that there was a case to be made that it should also have been included in the social post itself. They said that there was no attempt to exclude the information deliberately as they always sought to adhere to the relevant guidelines on branded, sponsored and advertorial content. They said that they would be happy to insist that the responsibility messaging together with a link to a gambling awareness website be included in all social media posts of a similar nature in the future, or to take any measures that ASAI advise.
Issue 2 – Post 2 and 4 (Media 1) and Post 3 (Media 2):
The advertisers said that they place advertorial content on news sites which was a common marketing practice. They said that all Facebook posts were clearly marked as either “Paid Partnership” or “Sponsored”.
The advertisers also stated that the advertorials linked to from the social media posts had been clearly marked to show the commercial nature of the content, and that the footer of each advertorial had included the tags for “sponsored” and “advertorial”.
Response from Media 1:
The media stated that the social media advertisements had been clearly identified as advertising by including “paid partnership”.
They said that the advertorial article, linked to from the social post, had contained a message at the top of the article, clearly identifying it as an advertorial without any attempt to disguise it as ‘legitimate news content’.
Response from Media 2:
The media stated that the advertisement on their social media page had clearly stated that it was “sponsored”, therefore, alerting the audience that it was an advertisement and not editorial. They also said that the article that the sponsored post had linked to had included a clear description on the first line that the article was an advertorial.
Issue 3 – Post 2 and 4 (Media 1) and Post 3 (Media 2):
The advertisers stated that their advertising account on Facebook was whitelisted for gambling and that all marketing campaigns were only targeted to over 18’s and also displayed the ‘18+’ warning symbol. They said that the Facebook adverts clicked through to the full article on the media owner’s website, where further information was provided before a customer had the opportunity to navigate to their website. In regard to the advertorials, they said that all websites they advertise on are carefully selected to make sure they are not directed to, or would appeal to, under 18’s. They said that the advertorial on the media owner’s website included an 18+ symbol at both the top and footer of the article.
Response from Media 1:
The media said that to the best of their knowledge, there was no requirement to age-gate the post itself, and that the articles on their website had included the ’18+’ notification.
Response from Media 2:
The media stated that the image in the social media posts had included the ‘18+’ messaging and they said that the advertisement was run on a Facebook advertising account operated by the advertiser (LottoGo) and was whitelisted by Facebook for Gambling advertisements. They said that when such advertisements are submitted to Facebook, the target demographic must be set to be for 18+, otherwise Facebook’s automatic review would reject the advertisement.
Further Information:
The Executive reviewed Facebook’s Advertising Policy for Online Gaming and Gambling which stated:
“Facebook’s Online Gaming and Gambling Advertising Policy
Ads that promote online gambling and gaming, where anything of monetary value (including cash or digital/virtual currencies, e.g. bitcoin) is required to play, and anything of monetary value forms part of the prize, are only allowed with our prior written permission. This includes games where purchases are required to continue game play and/or provide advantage in winning prizes, in cases where the prize is of monetary value. Authorized advertisers must follow all applicable laws, including targeting their ads in accordance with legal requirements. At a minimum, ads may not be targeted to people under 18 years of age.
Note: Common types of gambling or gaming activities which may require permission include betting, lotteries, raffles, casino, fantasy sports, bingo, poker, online skill-based tournaments and sweepstakes.”
The policy also referred to various types of activity that did not require permission that included the following:
“State/Government Run Lotteries
Promotion of a state/government lottery by an entity which has direct or exclusive responsibility for running that state/government lottery does not require permission. Agencies or Affiliates working on behalf of, or in connection with, State/Government lotteries require prior written approval, as do private lotteries operated under a government license, which are not actually administered by the government.”
1 https://www.facebook.com/business/help/345214789920228?id=352746782475779
Conclusion
Complaints Upheld In Part
The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaints and the advertiser and media responses.
Issue 1 (re Post 1) – Upheld
The Committee noted the Code requirement that all marketing communications for gambling services or products shall contain a message to encourage responsible gambling and shall direct people to a source of information about gambling and gambling responsibly. They also noted that the advertorial that had been linked to from Post 1 had included a responsibility message. However, the advertisement in Post 1, the social media post, had not included a responsibility message together with a direction to a source of information about gambling and gambling responsibly. In the circumstances, the Committee considered that this advertisement (Post 1) was in breach of Section 10.10 of the Code.
Issue 2 (re Posts 2, 3 and 4) – Not Upheld
The Committee noted the requirements of the Code that a marketing communication should be designed and presented so that it is clear that it is a marketing communication. They noted that Posts 2, 3 and 4 had included the term “sponsored” immediately below the media name. The Committee considered that it was clear that the material was a marketing communication. They also considered that this fact was reinforced by the inclusion of text beside the media name that stated “with LottoGo.com”. In the circumstances, the Committee did not consider that Posts 2, 3 or 4 were in breach of the Code on the grounds raised at Issue 2.
Issue 3 (Posts 2, 3 and 4) – Not Upheld
They Committee noted that the advertisers’ Facebook advertising account was whitelisted for gambling with their marketing campaigns targeted to over 18s. They also noted that the advertising had stated ‘18+’ In the circumstances the Committee did not consider that Posts 2, 3 and 4 were in breach of the Code on the grounds raised at Issue 3.
Action Required:
Issue 1:
The advertising should not reappear in its current form again. The Committee reminded both advertisers and media that all marketing communications for gambling services or products include a message to encourage responsible gambling and also a direction to a source of information about gambling and gambling responsibly.
Issue 2:
No further action required.
Issue 3:
No further action required.
