ASA rulings against Huel and Zoe spark controversy
Advertisements displayed on Facebook earlier this year by the meal replacement brand and the microbiome tech company included Bartlett promoting products by businesses with which he has commercial relationships.
However, the ads were challenged for not disclosing his role as a director at Huel and investor in Zoe, which the independent regulatory body argued could mislead consumers.
The high-profile status and therefore following of Bartlett (of Dragons’ Den and Diary of a CEO fame) has prompted a flurry of opinion-posting on LinkedIn, with some praising the ASA for holding all brands to the same standards regardless of profile and others sharing frustrations over the potentially pedantic nature of the ruling.
Huel
Huel was pulled up for two Facebook ads featuring Bartlett. The first highlighted Bartlett's endorsement of Huel's Daily Greens drink, and the second showed Bartlett praising the product alongside a consumer's reaction.
Complainants argued that omitting Bartlett's commercial interest in Huel was misleading. Yet Huel argued that the ads were clearly identifiable as paid promotions and that consumers would understand the commercial relationship.
However, the ASA upheld the complaint, concluding that Bartlett's directorship was material information that should have been disclosed.
Zoe
Zoe’s ad included a quote from Bartlett endorsing the product, which led complainants to argue that the lack of disclosure about his investment was misleading.
The company argued that the average consumer would already assume a commercial relationship between Bartlett and the company and that explicit disclosure of his investor status was unnecessary.
However, the ASA upheld the complaint, stating that omitting Bartlett's investor status was misleading, as it was material information that consumers needed to make informed decisions.
In a statement provided by a Zoe spokesperson, the brand defended its stance on the ruling, noting that
"neither the Code nor any of the ASA’s guidance suggests that it is necessary to go into granular detail about the precise nature of an ambassador's commercial relationship with a brand" and confirming the company's belief that the ad was compliant with the Cap Code.
What is the ASA?
The Advertising Standards Authority is the self-regulatory organization of the advertising industry in the United Kingdom.
It cannot interpret or enforce legislation, however its guidance is written to broadly reflect legislation.
It aims to regulate the content of advertisements, sales promotions and direct marketing in the UK by investigating complaints made about ads, sales promotions or direct marketing.
The ASA is also now employing an Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to proactively search for online ads that might break the rules.
Mixed responses
Chief finance reporter at The Grocer, Eddie Devlin, shared his praise for the ASA’s decision on LinkedIn, writing “Well done to the ASA for the ruling—brands must be transparent and honest with consumers when it comes to the commercial roles of influencers.”
Mirroring this sentiment, director general of the Influencer Marketing Trade Body Scott Guthrie, wrote: “Advertising rules are to protect all consumers—not only those who listen to a particular podcast."
However, the ruling also sparked support for Bartlett.
Drawing on recent experience with the ASA, founder and CEO of The Tumeric Co. shared his frustrations at the announcement on LinkedIn.
“We’ve experienced similar frustrations at The Turmeric Co.," he wrote, explaining the brand was banned from sharing testimonials in commercial content. “Time for guidelines to be updated and for small businesses to be empowered to share authentic customer stories.”
Simon Squibb, founder of business advice platform HelpBnk, agreed and came to Bartlett's defense, noting that the ASA’s ruling was a “dangerous standard to set.”
“This is massively unfair on Steven Bartlett—all the promotions he has done for these products are clearly labeled as an ad,” he wrote. “The issue is he’s a shareholder in these companies, but let’s be honest—him being an investor is actually proof that he believes in the products.”
Squib suggested that the ruling would send the wrong message about investing in a business and then promoting it, stating, “I think this kind of ruling needs to be challenged.”
ASA authority
Now the ASA’s authority has come into question, with Mark Tallon, managing partner at food law consultancy Legal Foods, commenting on the organization's actions under its LinkedIn post on the ruling.
“How did the ASA ban an advert if you are not a statutory regulator with no legal enforcement powers to ban any advert,” he wrote.
Speaking to NutraIngredients, Tallon noted that the main concern is that the enforcement of laws should be handled by statutory regulators rather than private entities like the ASA.
He noted that the ASA may be overstepping its role by presenting itself to the public and media as a statutory regulator, which can also mislead consumers.
In Tallon's opinion, if the government relies on bodies like the ASA for enforcement due to budget constraints, there should be safeguards to allow businesses to bypass the ASA and address issues directly with statutory authorities, and there should be accountability for the ASA if it overreaches.
