Recent online ads for nutrition brands Huel and Zoe were banned.
- Steven Bartlett’s endorsements were deemed misleading by the ASA.
- Bartlett’s financial ties to the brands were not disclosed.
- Adverts failed to inform consumers of Bartlett’s investor and director roles.
- The ASA concluded that ads could wrongly influence consumer decisions.
In a significant move, online advertisements for the nutrition brands Zoe and Huel have been prohibited following endorsements by the prominent entrepreneur, Steven Bartlett. His social media endorsements, which ran in February and March, included positive statements about the products, but the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found them to be misleading due to a lack of transparency regarding Bartlett’s financial interests in these companies.
Specifically, the ASA objected to the absence of disclosure about Bartlett’s roles as an investor in Zoe and a director at Huel. The authority declared that these affiliations were crucial for consumers to make informed decisions about the products. The ASA’s ruling emphasised the importance of transparency, particularly in cases where high-profile individuals endorse products.
The controversy primarily centres around adverts that appeared on social media platforms. A Huel advertisement showcased an image of the brand’s Daily Green drink, accompanied by Bartlett’s assertion: “This is Huel’s best product,” implying an unbiased opinion. The ASA, however, noted that such endorsements did not sufficiently clarify Bartlett’s vested interest, thus potentially misleading consumers.
Similarly, the Zoe advertisement featured Bartlett promoting the brand with the enticing suggestion: “If you haven’t tried Zoe yet, give it a shot. It might just change your life.” The ASA argued that the ad’s failure to highlight Bartlett’s investment in Zoe could mislead consumers into perceiving the endorsement as impartial.
The ASA’s decision reflects its commitment to ensuring clarity in advertising, asserting that many viewers might not discern the commercial relationship from the adverts alone. Consequently, the adverts for both Huel and Zoe have been removed, as they were deemed likely to mislead the average consumer.
The ASA’s ruling underscores the necessity for transparency in advertisements involving celebrity endorsements.
