Advertisment
The post published on the Influencer’s Instagram account featured her showcasing her hairstyle and outfit. The text at the bottom of the post included the following:
“Tan Mrs GlamDark @bperfectcosmetics AD (SARABP)”.
Complaint
The complainant considered the post was not clear that it was advertising material as the word ‘AD’ was hidden at first and it was only by clicking on the word ‘more’ that it became visible.
Response
The advertisers failed to provide a response to the complaint.
The Influencer said the main purpose of the post in question had been to showcase their curly blow dry and outfit, the other content had been created around that. They said they were a brand ambassador for BPerfect Cosmetics, and while they had tagged the brand, the post was not part of their paid contract. They said they had tagged the brand and provided a code for their followers as they knew they would be asking questions about the products they were wearing.
The Influencer said they were very proud to work with the brand and always tried their best to follow the ASA Guidelines. They offered their apologies to the complainant for any upset caused.
Conclusion
Complaint Upheld.
The Complaints Council considered the detail of the complaint and the influencer’s response. They expressed concern at the advertisers’ failure to respond to the complaint. They reminded them that there is an onus on all advertisers to ensure that their marketing communications are in conformity with the Code
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.
The Council noted that the influencer was a brand ambassador for the advertisers and therefore, the post was advertising content. While the influencer had included the ‘AD’ disclosure, the correct primary label ‘#AD’ had not been used and it had not been placed at the beginning of the post as required under the guidance. In the circumstances, the Council concluded that the omission of the # and the incorrect placement of the word ‘Ad’ was in breach of Sections 3.31 and 3.32 of the Code.
In view of the advertisers’ failure to respond to the complaint, the Council also upheld the complaint under Section 3.10 of the Code.
ACTION REQUIRED:
The Council reminded all parties to ensure that their advertising complied with the requirements of the guidance.
