Print This Post
Bulletin: 19/5
Batch: 258
Reference: 33164
Product: Clothing/Footwear
Advertiser: Conor Ryan, No Label Ireland
Influencer:
Agency:
Medium: Social Media (Blogger's Own Page)
Codes:
ASAI Code 7th Edition: 2.4(c), 3.31, 3.32
The post featured a photograph of the influencer wearing a t-shirt by the brand in question, and stated the following:
“conorryan75 No matter how slow the pace is don’t worry about it still making progress
@Nolabel.ireland – t shirt check there (sic) page out this tee and a white one now available! #Clothing #Fashion #Style #Trend #Stlye”The complainant said that the post in question had not been identified as advertising material.
The advertiser advised that they were aware that all marketing communications should be presented in such a way that it was clear that it was a marketing communication. They said that their audience were male aged 15-30 with an interest in male fashion and streetwear fashion. They confirmed that the influencer was requested to create content for his Social media via his Instagram account in return for a payment by announcing that “Their website goes live at 6pm”, “To check their Instagram account out” and also to “Enter the giveway on their Instagram account”. They advised that there was no written agreement with the influencer but only a mutual agreement through a direct message on Instagram. They said that the post was uploaded on Conor Ryan's Instagram in return for a fee and it was a sponsored post.
The advertiser advised that since the ASAI contacted Conor Ryan and No Label Ireland, the influencer had edited the caption to state it was a marketing communication.
The influencer advised that he forgot to put #gift on that post and acknowledged that it was his decision to post the content.
Complaint upheld.
The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaint and the advertisers’ response. They noted the advertisers’ comments on the nature of the post and what they wanted the influencer to promote.
The Committee acknowledged the human error having occurred, but that nevertheless, the onus under the Code was to ensure that all marketing communications were clearly identifiable as such to consumers prior to them engaging with the content.
As the post had not been identified as advertising material, the Committee concluded that the advertising had breached Sections 3.31 and 3.32 of the Code.
ACTION REQUIRED:
The advertisement should not appear in the current form. The Committee reminded all involved in the creation of marketing communication, that in the interest of clarity it was essential that they clearly identify all marketing communications as such.