UK LEGAL COMMENT
Codes of practice: the implications
Northridge Law’s Melanie Ellis looks at key changes in the Advertising Standards Authority’s rules for the UK
which included a video featuring Premier League footballers Philippe Coutinho, Jesse Lingard and Kalidou Koulibaly. The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)
A
strengthened its codes of practice relating to the appeal of gambling adverts to children in October 2022 and this ruling is its first under the new guidelines. The new rule states that adverts for gambling must not “be of strong appeal to children or young persons, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture” (CAP Code 16.3.12 and BCAP Code 17.4.5). This replaced previous wording that adverts must not be of “particular appeal” to under-18s. The implications of the revised wording rely on the
interpretation placed on it by the ASA: the advertising regulator interpreted “particular appeal” to mean that adverts should not appeal more to those aged under 18 compared to those aged over 18, whereas it interprets “strong appeal” in isolation, without reference to the adverts comparative appeal to adults. This difference is crucial, particularly when considering the use of top football players in adverts. Whilst it has always been accepted that such characters appeal to children, under the previous wording the fact that they had equal appeal to adults enabled them to be used to advertise gambling. In the advert in question, the Ladbrokes logo appeared alongside a video featuring images of the footballers. It has previously been established that the mere presence of a gambling operator logo is sufficient to make a communication an advert for its gambling facilities, despite not including any
40 FEBRUARY 2023
recent ruling provides important guidance in relation to the appearance of top footballers and other sports personalities in gambling adverts, particularly in the social media context. The subject of the ruling was a Tweet by Ladbrokes,
call to action and, although the ruling doesn’t contain specific commentary on this point, it can be taken as confirmation of this. The Tweet was clearly considered by the ASA to be an advert for the operator’s gambling facilities. Ladbrokes’ response to the ASA’s challenge does not include any suggestion that the three footballers did not have “strong appeal” to under-18s. From guidance issued by the ASA alongside the new rule, we know that the regulator considers “UK footballers who play for top clubs, UK national teams or in high-profile competitions” to be “high risk” and likely to be assessed as having strong appeal to under-18s. Whilst not specifically stated in the rules of guidance, this appears to place the burden of proof on the advertiser to demonstrate that such characters do not have strong appeal to under-18s. This is borne out by the ASA’s approach in this case. It
noted that “football was an activity in which a very significant proportion of under-18s participated directly on a frequent basis, and had a general interest in through following professional teams and players across a variety of media. There was also a highly developed infrastructure around organised participation and the sport had an exceptionally high media profile including popular, dedicated media for under-18s. Those who played at an elite level were likely to appeal strongly to children.” As Coutinho, Lingard and Koulibaly were all current Premier League footballers and had played international football, the ASA concluded they would be well known to the large numbers of children who follow football. Based upon this assessment, the ASA proceeded on the basis that the footballers did have strong appeal to under-18s and Ladbrokes does not appear to have presented any evidence to dispute this.
Photo by Daniel Norin on Unsplash
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
