Advertisment
A social media post by the influencer for Blanchardstown Centre featured the influencer visiting Blanchardstown Centre shopping for ‘back to school’ items. Wording of the post included:
“We did a full back to school shop @blanchardstown_centre – everything from shoes and uniforms to the cutest stationery, all in one trip!”
Included at the bottom of the post were the following hashtags:
“#ad #BlanchardstownCentre #BackToSchool”
Complaint
A complainant objected to the post on the following grounds.
Issue 1:
The complainant, while noting that the post had been amended, objected to the fact that the disclosure initially used had a space between the ‘a’ and ‘d’. The complainant noted the same format had been used in numerous posts by the influencer and considered it was misleading, particularly for those with dyslexia, and that it was a way of concealing transparency.
Issue 2:
The Executive, while acknowledging that the post had been amended to remove the space between the letters, noted that the disclosure had been at the bottom of the post, as such it was not immediately clear that the posts were a marketing communication.
Response
Advertisers’ Response:
The advertisers said that they took their responsibilities under the Code extremely seriously. They said that their influencer partnerships were professionally managed by their agency, and that their agency’s team were dedicated to maintaining full compliance and proactively ensured that their internal training and industry knowledge remained current with the latest ASA guidance. The advertisers said that they followed a rigorous, multi-stage process for briefing, content review and ongoing monitoring of all influencer content.
Issue 1:
The advertisers said that the influencer received a comprehensive briefing that included a detailed written brief that explicitly outlined ASA advertising disclosure requirements, with mandatory instructions to use the primary label “#AD”. By way of example, they provided a copy of their briefing document to the Executive. The advertisers said that their contracts with all talent featured clear compliance clauses reflecting ASA standards and labelling obligations. They also said that a follow up call with the influencer was conducted to reiterate the mandatory requirements.
They said that the specific caption for the post, containing the correct “#AD” was approved by both them and their agency, with a request to include ‘@BlanchardstownCentre’ to enhance transparency. They advised that their agency’s team actively monitored the content when it went live and noticed the inadvertent use of “#a d” instead of the instructed “#AD” and they raised it with the influencer’s agency. They said that it was their understanding that the influencer corrected the error shortly after the original posting.
The advertisers said that they took all reasonable, proactive and diligently executed steps to ensure full compliance with the Code. They said that their brief was clear, their contract was comprehensive, that the approved caption was correct and that prompt action was taken to rectify the error.
They said that they had undertaken a comprehensive review of their internal processes to reinforce safeguards and further minimize the risk of any deviation from approved content in future campaigns.
Issue 2:
The advertiser did not comment on the position of the disclosure in the post.
Influencer’s Response:
Issue 1:
The influencer stated that they took their responsibilities under the Code seriously and were fully committed to ensuring that all paid or gifted content was clearly identifiable as advertising.
They said that, in this instance, the incorrect spacing in the hashtag (“#A D”) occurred solely as a result of their phone’s auto-correct function while they were posting. They said that as soon as they became aware of the error, they corrected the hashtag to #AD and that at no point was there any intention to obscure the commercial nature of the post or to mislead their audience.
They advised that in order to prevent this from happening again, they had adjusted their posting process by drafting sponsored captions separately before publishing and double checking all disclosure hashtags prior to posting.
Issue 2:
The influencer did not comment on the position of the disclosure in the post.
Conclusion
The Complaints Council considered the detail of the complaint and the responses from the advertisers and the influencer. They noted the advertisers’ comments concerning their briefing document which included a mandatory requirement to use the disclosure #AD.
The Council welcomed the fact that both the advertisers and the influencer took their responsibilities under the Code seriously and they welcomed the steps taken by the advertisers to ensure compliance by influencers working with them.
Issue 1 – Complaint Upheld:
The Council noted the Code requirements that marketing communications should be clear that they are marketing communications and also the requirements of the joint guidance published by the Advertising Standards Authority and the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) on disclosing advertising content, which required that advertising content should have one of three primary labels as a disclosure; #AD, a platform provided tool or #Gifted, depending on the content, and that the disclosure should be the first word in any text block. The Council considered that by providing for specific disclosures, consumer recognition that content is advertising would be enhanced.
The Council noted that the approved post had included the disclosure #AD. The Council also noted the response that the inclusion of the space was as a result of an ‘auto correct’ error. While the Council noted that the disclosure had been amended to remove the space, at the time of publication, the primary disclosure used was incorrect and the content had not been identified correctly as advertising material. In the circumstances the Council considered that the post at the time of publication was in breach of Sections 3.31, 3.32, 4.01 and 4.04 of the Code.
Issue 2 – Complaint Upheld:
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 considered that by providing for specific disclosures, consumer recognition that content is advertising would be enhanced. In addition, they noted that the Joint Guidance provided that advertising disclosures should be at the start of a video and the first word in a text block.
The Council noted that while the disclosure “#AD” had ultimately been used, it had been positioned at the end of the post and was not the first word in the post, as such, they considered the post was not immediately identifiable as commercial content. In the circumstances, the Council concluded that the placement of the primary disclosure was in breach of Sections 3.31 and 3.32 of the Code.
Action Required:
The advertising should not appear in its current form again. The Council reminded all parties of the requirements of the ASA Code and the Guidance in regard to disclosing commercial content posted by influencers.
