Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland releases latest Complaints Bulletin
14 advertisements across social media, email and online were found to be in breach of the ASAI Code on grounds related to a range of issues including Misleading, Principles, Health and Beauty, Gambling, Alcoholic Drinks and Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverages.
The Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland’s (ASAI) independent Complaints Committee has released its latest Complaints Bulletin, which contains 16 case reports on complaints recently investigated by the organisation.
11 of the 16 cases were upheld and 3 of the 16 cases were upheld in part. Advertisements across social media, email and online were found to be in breach of the ASAI Code on grounds related to Misleading, Principles, Health and Beauty, Gambling, Alcoholic Drinks and Food and Non–Alcoholic Beverages. The ASAI Complaints Committee chose not to uphold 2 complaints.
The Complaints Committee is a completely independent arm of the ASAI and is responsible for considering and adjudicating on complaints submitted by the public, by an organisation, by a Government Department, or any other person or body. The Committee is made up of a range of experts from the advertising, media, education, consumer, and marketing sectors. See further details here – http://www.asai.ie/about-us/complaints-committee
Commenting on the latest ASAI rulings, Orla Twomey, Chief Executive of the ASAI, stated:
“The latest complaints bulletin from the ASAI shows that we have an important role in ensuring that advertisers in Ireland adhere to the advertising code. The ASAI monitors advertisements and marketing communications regularly to ensure that they are legal, truthful, decent, and honest, prepared with a sense of social responsibility to the consumer and society and with proper respect for the principles of fair competition.”
“The ASAI provides a free and confidential copy advice service to the advertising industry to help them create responsible ads. If an advertiser, agency, or medium has any concerns about a marketing communications’ compliance with the ASAI’s Code, they can contact us and avail of the free and confidential copy advice service.”
Below is a list of advertisements that have been found to be in breach of the ASAI Code:
Advertiser | Medium | Complaint Category | Description | Complaint Status | Section Breached | Link |
Lidl Ireland | Leaflet | Principles |
The complainant considered the man featured on the paddle board not wearing a life jacket was against the law. They considered that the ad could encourage people to not wear a lifejacket when using watercrafts which may result in loss of life. |
Upheld | 3.24 | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/retail-supermarket-10/ |
Bongo Operations Pty
|
Social Media (Influencers own page)
|
Principles |
The complainant objected that the posts, which they considered were advertisements, did not include an appropriate # such as #ad to disclose that the posts were advertisements. |
Upheld | 3.31 and 3.32 | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/telecommunications-87/ |
SOSU (Suzanne Jackson)
|
Online (Social Media) |
Misleading |
The complainant said that the post suggested that the model’s dramatic eye look had been created by her using the mascara and kohl pencil featured, when in fact she was wearing false eyelashes. The complainant considered the post to be misleading. |
Upheld | 4.1 |
|
Renewell Water Limited
|
Social Media (Influencer Page) | Principles / Substantiation |
The complainant considered the advertising to be scaremongering as it gave the false impression that tap water is unsuitable for drinking. Issue 1: The complainant queried the testing process which had taken place on the Influencer’s tap water as they believed that no information had been provided on same. They said the instrumentation used in the process gave consumers the false impression that the water was ‘dirty.’ Issue 2 The complainant said that no testing had been conducted on the filtered water or information provided on how it compared to the tap water. Issue 3 The complainant considered it to be inappropriate for an untrained person to give advice on drinking water quality without the inclusion of fact-based evidence.
|
Upheld | 3.10, 4.9 and 4.10. | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/beverages-5/ |
LottoGo |
Online (Third Party Social Media) |
Gambling
|
2 complaints were received against 4 posts on social media. 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. |
Issue 1 Upheld.
Issue 2 and 3 Not Upheld. |
10.10 | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/gambling-2/ |
Sims IVF |
Online (Third Party Advertising) |
Misleading / Substantiation
|
The complainant considered that the claim “Ireland’s No. 1 IVF Clinic” was
misleading and questioned what criteria was used for the basis of the claim. |
Upheld |
4.1, 4.4, 4.9, 4.10 and 4.33 |
https://www.asai.ie/complaint/health-fertility-treatment/ |
Foreo Luna |
Online (Influencer Social Media Page) |
Misleading / Health and Beauty |
The complainant considered that the reference to #acneremoval in the advertisement alluded to the fact that the device would cure acne which they considered to be misleading. |
Upheld | 4.1 and 11.1 | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/health-beauty-beauty/ |
MSL Motors |
Online (Influencer Social Media Page) |
Principles |
The complainant objected to the post on the grounds that the influencer was a brand
ambassador for the car brand but had not included any disclosure of this on the post. |
Upheld |
3.31 and 3.32
|
https://www.asai.ie/complaint/motoring-47/ |
Sky Ireland |
Online (Advertisers Own Website) |
Misleading
|
The complainant viewed the advertisement on the 21st of November and noted that the price for the TV element was increasing on the 1st of December, therefore, the price would be increasing during the first month of a subscription. The complainant considered that the advertised price of €60 a month for 12 months was misleading if the price was going to increase during the first month. |
Upheld |
4.1 and 4.22 |
|
What’s For Dinner | Direct Mail (Email) | Alcoholic Drinks |
The complainant considered that advertisement promoted the consumption of alcohol and was misleading by suggesting that alcohol: Issue 1: Was in some way good for you. Issue 2: Was low in calories. Issue 3: The complainant also considered that this type of marketing could be extremely harmful to someone in the early stages of recovery from alcohol addiction. Issue 4: The ASAI Executive noted that the advertisement had not included a responsibility message.
|
Issue 1 and Issue 4 Upheld.
Issue 2 and 3 Not Upheld. |
9.4 and 9.8g | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/alcohol-28/ |
McCabes Pharmacy |
Internet (Social Media) |
Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverages |
The complainant considered that Stage 1 Infant Formula was not permitted to be advertised in the interest of protecting breast feeding.
|
Upheld |
8.31 |
https://www.asai.ie/complaint/food-non-alcoholic-beverages-stage-1-infant-formula-3/ |
Seasons Hub (Loulouka) | Internet (Social Media) | Food and Non – Alcoholic Beverages |
The complainant objected to the advertisement as they believed that Stage 1 Infant Formula was not permitted to be advertised.
|
Upheld |
8.31 |
https://www.asai.ie/complaint/food-non-alcoholic-beverages-stage-1-infant-formula-4/ |
Applegreen |
Online (Influencer Social Media Account and Third-Party Website) |
Principles / Misleading | 4 complaints were received regarding the advertising.
The complainants objected to the advertising on the grounds that it was misleading to describe the product as “Vegan Chicken” as the complainants believed that it was a breach of EU law to associate an animal product with a vegan food. Another complainant considered that consumers associated the word ‘chicken’ with meat and that the advertisement was misleading. |
Upheld |
3.14, 4.1 and 4.4 |
https://www.asai.ie/complaint/food-non-alcoholic-beverages-6/ |
FX Supplements | Online (Company Own Website) | Misleading / Substantiation / Health and Beauty
|
Issue 1: The complainant considered the advertisement misleading and could be substantiated, particularly as they noted that no source had been provided for the claim: Issue 2: The complainant challenged whether the claim “LactiGo is proven to increase performance in 45 mins of use from the first time you use it.” could be substantiated and questioned where the claim originated. Issue 3: The complainant challenged whether the claim “Up to 15% increase in performance by elite athletes after one application (Journal of exercise physiology).” had been substantiated by the referenced Journal as they considered that the claim was misleading. Issue 4: The complainant questioned whether the claim “Reduces levels of lactate build up” had been substantiated and asked how the levels had been measured. Issue 5: The complainant challenged whether the claim “LactiGo users ran up to 9 seconds faster,” could be substantiated and they requested evidence for the claim.
|
Issue 1 and 4 Upheld. Issue 2, 3 and 5 Not Upheld. |
4.1, 4.4, 4.9. 4.10, 4.17 and 11.1 | https://www.asai.ie/complaint/health-beauty-64/ |
The following advertisements were investigated and the ASAI Complaints Committee found that they did not breach the Code on the grounds raised in the complaints.
Advertiser | Medium | Complaint Category | Description | Complaint Status | Section Breached | Link |
JTI Ireland |
Outdoor (Roadside 48/12 sheet) |
Principles / Misleading / Children
|
Issue 1 The complainant considered the use of the terms ‘enjoy’ and ‘fresh’ in conjunction with a nicotine product, as ill-advised and out of step with medical advice. Issue 2 One complainant considered that the product should not have been advertised on a busy road where all ages could view the content of the advertisement |
Not Upheld |
N/A |
|
Vodafone | Television |
Principles / Children
|
8 complaints were received regarding the ad raising the following issues:
Issue 1: The complainant considered the depiction of the older child being ignored suggested that a mobile phone was a replacement for a lack of parents’ attention. Issue 2: The complainant considered that the advertisement suggested that teenagers were not included in family life unless they had a mobile phone. Issue 3: The complainant considered that the advertisement suggested that mobile phones were a way of parents managing children’s emotional difficulties. Issue 4: The complainant considered that the advertisement suggested parents should purchase mobile phones for their children.
|
Not Upheld |
N/A |
https://www.asai.ie/complaint/telecommunications-89/ |
The ASAI conducts ongoing monitoring of advertising across all media and since 2007, has examined over 27,000 advertisements, with an overall compliance rate of 98 percent. The ASAI Monitoring Service monitors compliance with the Complaints Committee’s adjudications.
Media are reminded that advertisements found to be in breach of the Code cannot be accepted for publication.
Follow The Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland on LinkedIn and Twitter @THE_ASAI