The ASA has ruled that UNIQLO’s “recycled materials” claim in an ad for fleece coats and jackets was misleading, as the evidence did not demonstrate that the products were made entirely from recycled materials.
The ASA issues further rulings under the “less healthy” food and drink advertising restrictions.
Research commissioned by the ASA into consumer attitudes to the provision of material information in online ads finds that consumers generally accept material information being “one click away”, though they expect key details upfront in higher-risk contexts. The findings do not alter the ASA’s existing regulatory approach under the Advertising Codes.
The ASA’s report on environmental claims in UK online advertising finds that, while such claims are relatively rare, they frequently use high-risk absolute terms such as “eco-friendly” and “sustainable” that require significant substantiation under the CAP Code.
The ASA has ruled on whether environmental claims in an advertiser’s ads regarding British beef and dairy could be considered misleading.
The ASA finds harmful gender stereotype in a DIY ad.
The ASA ruled that 111skin’s “Exosome Face Lift” product listing made efficacy claims that could not be substantiated and exaggerated the effects of the product, in breach of the CAP Code.
The ASA ruled on a social media post promoting cushions via an affiliate link, finding that earning commission on sales was sufficient to make the post an ad requiring clear and prominent labelling from the outset.
The UK has prohibited tobacco and vaping advertising under the Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026, while the European Commission consults on modernising its own tobacco advertising and product rules.
The ASA has banned social media posts featuring Harry Kane and Erling Haaland as gambling ads with strong appeal to under-18s, while clearing an advertiser’s use of Thierry Henry against a backdrop of increased ASA scrutiny on the issue. An enforcement notice signals active monitoring from 11 June 2026.
ASA rules that a dance app using a money back model cannot be descried as “free”.
Two recent ASA rulings have addressed the extent to which advertisers can reference ADHD when promoting consumer products.
