Description:
A video post that promoted skincare products. The caption accompanying the video included a series of hashtags, including “#paulaschoicepartner”.
Complaint:
The complainant found the post misleading as the relationship between the influencer and the brand was not accurately disclosed in the video. The complainant found that there was no indication of this being a paid partnership.
Response:
In its response to Council, Noam Raiter’s representation confirmed that there was a material connection between the influencer and Paula’s Choice and that this was disclosed by the “#paulaschoicepartner” within the caption.
Decision:
Council considered the complaint together with the advertiser’s response.
Council members understood that the influencer included a hashtag in the post’s caption. However, they considered that the hashtag’s placement should have been more conspicuous to disclose the partnership. This could have been done by placing “#paulaschoicepartner” at the beginning of the list of hashtags.
Furthermore, Council members found that the hashtag alone was not sufficient to disclose the material connection to the average viewer. They suggested that the video itself should have included a disclaimer in audio and/or video.
As a result, Council determined the post did not include the necessary disclosure identifying the material connection between the parties to the average consumer.
Council unanimously found that the advertisement contravened Clause 1(b) of the Code, given the ad omitted relevant information, which rendered it to be misleading. All Council members also found the ad contravened Clause 7 of the Code, as the lack of disclosure prevented their testimonial being a clearly genuine representation based on their experience with the product.
Infraction:
1(b) (Accuracy and Clarity), Clause 7 (Testimonials)
