Who: The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and LC International t/a Coral
Where: United Kingdom
When: 31 July 2024
Law stated as at: 19 August 2024
What happened:
In March 2024, during the Cheltenham Festival, Coral displayed an ad on a digital billboard mounted on a van (a “digivan”) aimed at attendees of the horse racing. The ad featured a man dressed in attire typical of an attendee of a racing event and included text that read, “THE HEAD TO TOE TWEEDERS […] WE’RE HERE FOR IT […] CORAL”. This digivan was one of a fleet of eight vans that displayed ads along the route from Cheltenham town centre to the race course.
The complainant challenged whether the ads had been responsibly placed because the van had been parked near two schools while displaying an ad for a gambling company.
In response to the ASA’s probe of the ad’s placement, Coral explained in detail the measures taken to ensure the appropriate and responsible placement of the ad. These included:
- following the ASA’s recommendation for outdoor ads promoting age-restricted products to be placed no closer than 100 metres away from a school;
- instructing the drivers of the digivans to stay at least 200 metres away from the local schools;
- activating the digital billboards only between the hours of 9am and 5pm, when most under 18s in the area would be at school; and
- rebriefing their ad media partners after receiving the complaint to ensure that future campaigns follow the 200-metre guidance wherever possible.
Coral also provided the ASA with a map showing the positioning of the digivans relative to the schools in the area to confirm their adherence with the ASA guidelines.
ASA’s response
The ASA, in its decision, referred to the following sections of the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct and Promotional Marketing (CAP Code):
- 16.1, which states “that marketing communications must be socially responsible, with particular regard to the need to protect children, young persons and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited“; and
- 16.3.13, which states that “marketing communications must not be directed at those aged below 18 years…through the selection of media or context in which they appear“.
It also noted that no medium should be used to advertise gambling if more than 25% of its audience is under the age of 18. Although the ASA acknowledged that the untargeted nature of the digivan medium meant that the ads were likely to be seen by many people, including under 18s, it recognised that Coral’s protective measures were sufficient to minimise this risk and ensure that under 18s comprised less than 25% of the audience of the ads. It noted that, in the mornings, the digivans were parked 800 metres away from a secondary school and 150 metres away from a primary school, that there was no direct line of sight from either school to the digivans and that drivers had been instructed to remain more than 200 metres away from schools and to only activate the ads after 9am.
As a result, the ASA found that the ad did not breach the CAP Code and so did not uphold the complaint.
Why this matters
Coral was able to demonstrate that it had gone above and beyond the rules (such as the 200 metres restriction as opposed to the 100 metres restriction). It also carefully implemented other protections for children (such as not turning on the advertising until 9am, when children have started their school day). Finally, Coral was able to demonstrate strong communication channels with the third parties that were activating the advertising on Coral’s behalf. This ruling shows how the following are all key to defending ASA complaints in heavily regulated industries such as gambling: careful compliance with the CAP Code and associated guidance; the consideration of any additional measures which may need to be implemented; documentation of measures and compliance with the CAP Code and associated guidance; and strong communication channels with third parties under advertisers’ control.
