Marketing Matters | Review of July 2025

Welcome to this edition of Marketing Matters, where we look at advertising and marketing (A&M) trends in the retail and consumer sector.

We will be looking at:

• Some of the key takeaways for A&M departments following April's ASA rulings.
• Other top ASA stories.
• CMA news for the same period.

ASA rulings – key takeaways for your A&M departments

In July, the ASA handed down a staggering 40 rulings. We have highlighted some of the key rulings we think you and your A&M departments should be aware of.

As noted in previous editions of our Marketing Matters articles, on 7 April 2025, the BCAP and CAP Codes were updated in light of the introduction of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (“DMCCA") to reflect changes introduced by the new legislation. Whilst the ASA will continue to consider complaints made prior to 7 April 2025, the old versions of the Codes will be applied to such complaints, with the new Codes being applied to complaints made on or after such date. July's rulings are therefore a mixed bag, using both the old and new rules.

Cracking down on prescription only weight-loss medication

With the demand for weight-loss drugs on the rise in the UK, the ASA has launched a larger piece of work on prescription only medicines (POMs) used for weight-loss. In July alone, the ASA identified and investigated 9 ads relating to POMs used for weight-loss using their Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to proactively search for online ads that might break the rules.

In one ruling, against a digital healthcare service providing an online platform for prescription treatments, the ASA challenged a paid-for Google search ad which included "weight loss injections" as text on the advertisement and whether it was promoting POMs to the public. The telehealth provider responded by confirming their services included a consultation with a qualified healthcare professional and educational resources to empower patient decision-making / treatment options (both POMs and non-POM items). However, they acknowledged that the claim “Weight Loss Injection” could have been misinterpreted as promoting POMs. The ad had been dynamically generated and used Google Ads Dynamic Search Ad to automatically generate their ad's headline and description, based on user search terms.

In another ruling, concerning a private healthcare provider, the ASA challenged the provider's ad which stated "weight loss…clinically designed weight loss pen program…makes weight loss easier". The ASA considered that "weight loss pen" was likely to be understood by consumers to mean injectable weight-loss medication.

The ASA were clear in their rulings, noting that POMs must not be advertised to the public and would be a breach of the Code. Additionally, they noted that all injectable forms of weight-loss medications were POMs. The Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency expressed concern that as weight-loss injections were legally classified as POMs, the use of the terms in the above ads were likely to lead to customers requesting a POM. The ASA, therefore, considered that all the ads noted above were a breach of the Code.

Rulings related to this wider piece of work of the ASA's can be found using the above two links.

An April Fools' joke or giving a false impression to consumers?

A soft drink retailer received complaints for an Instagram advertisement implying that a certain one of their flavours was being discontinued only to find out the following day that it was an April Fools' joke. The post contained an image of the flavoured drink in question with white wings attached and text which stated, "rest in peach" and "you may have heard that our iconic [drink] is getting discontinued. We know – it hurts (sorry if we’ve ruined your go-to afternoon chill bev). But don’t worry, the rest of your faves are still here to keep you refreshed. And who knows? Maybe one day, Peach will make a legendary comeback. We appreciate your understanding during this period of adjustment and apologize for any inconvenience caused. #RIPeach”.

The retailer responded to the ASA stating that the campaign was intended as a light-hearted April Fools’ joke, the suggestion was not meant to be taken seriously as the ad was playful, and that the ad would have been understood as a joke by consumers. They said the ads were limited to organic posts on their social media channels, and that many of their followers understood the ad as a joke, as displayed by comments on the posts, including the top comment, which had 60.3 thousand likes, which said, “THIS BETTER BE A JOKE” and other comments that referenced it was likely a marketing campaign.

In it's ruling, the ASA emphasised that the words used in the ad were likely to be understood by consumers to means that the drink was being discontinued and that there would be a limited amount of time to purchase the peach flavour drink before stocks ran out. It would have, therefore, placed a time-pressure on consumers. Further, the ad appeared 2 weeks before 01 April and given the timing of the ads and lack of clear context to explain or suggest that the ad was a joke, the ASA considered they gave the overall impression that the product was being discontinued, when that was not the case, which was likely to affect consumers’ decisions in relation to whether, and in what quantities, to purchase the product. The ad was upheld as misleading.

Delivery dramas

A florist retailer received complaints relating to an ad which stated “Flowers Harrogate – Flowers in 3 Hours" and a further ad on their website which featured the text “Free UK delivery from 3 hours”.

The ASA considered that consumers would understand from the claims on the ads that flowers would be delivered in 3 hours in Harrogate from the moment a consumer made a purchase. Additionally, they considered the claim "Same-day & Free Next-day Flower Delivery” on their website would be understood by consumers to mean same-day deliver and free next-day deliver of flowers would also be available in Harrogate. However, this was not the case. Same-day delivery was only available in London. The text "free UK delivery from 3 hours" suggested that delivery was available within 3 hours to UK addresses without exception. Text further down the page which stated "the selected arrangement is available for Same-Day delivery only within London” was not sufficient to mitigate this implication. It was only viewable by scrolling down the page and it was possible to proceed with the purchase without seeing the text. The qualification was not sufficiently prominent. The ASA ruled that the ads were misleading and breached the Code.

Takeaways

The key takeaways from the ASA rulings this month are:

• The ASA continue to use their AI system to actively identify ads that breach the Code
• Take care when advertising regulated or prescription only medication: The ASA have undertaken a larger piece of work to crack-down on these types of ads and we are likely to see further rulings in this area.
• Consider things from a consumer perspective: Will they get the joke, will they understand the context without being told?
• Be clear on delivery options available in different locations: Include all qualifications on delivery in a prominent position.

Top ASA stories last month

The ASA no longer co-regulates the UK's Video-Sharing Platforms (VSP)

As of 25 July 2025, the ASA no longer co-regulates the UK's VSP regime. The ASA had been a designated co-regulator for VSP-controlled advertising appearing on UK regulated VSP services during a transitional period whilst the Online Safety Act came into force. However, advertising carried by VSPs continues to be regulated under the CAP Code.

New guidance on advertising e-scooters and bikes

There is a growing number of e-scooters and e-bikes on UK public roads. However, many consumers are not aware that their use on public roads is not always legal. It is currently illegal to use privately-owned electric scooters on public land, such as on public roads and pavements, including in parks. There are exceptions for rental e-scooters in certain places, but these exceptions do not apply to privately owned e-scooters.

As private e-scooters can still be used on private land, they can still be advertised to the public. But the ASA has released guidance to retailers to emphasise that advertising e-scooters intended for private ownership should not depict or encourage their use in public spaces. In a 2022 ruling, a retailer was caught out for an ad on YouTube which showed e-scooters being ridden in what appeared to be an urban park. Despite text stating the product could not be used on public land, the ASA considered that this did not sufficiently counter the impression given by the ad that they could be used in public spaces. The ad was held to be misleading and socially irresponsible.

The full ASA guidance can be found here.

Recent CMA activity

Online consumer reviews

In April 2025, the CMA published new fake review guidance on account of the new Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (the "DMCCA") requirement, for retailers to take 'reasonable and proportionate steps' to limit and reduce the presence of fake consumer reviews on their platforms, coming into effect.

The new legislation and guidance may require retailers and businesses to make changes to their systems, online platforms and compliance programmes to implement the required steps to reduce fake reviews. The CMA allowed a 3 month adjustment period to allow businesses and retailers to digest the guidance and make the necessary changes. This 3 month period has now ended and the CMA has already completed a review of more than 100 businesses, focusing on how the retailers published policies prohibiting fake reviews and outlining their approach to incentivised reviews.

The results of the above investigation indicated that 54% of retailers could be failing to comply with the CMA's guidance, with some having no policy in place banning fake reviews or policies setting out their approach to incentivised reviews. Where policies were in place, they were unclear, incomplete or inaccessible to consumers.

Please contact us if your business requires any support in meeting its new compliance obligations under the DMCCA.

Price transparency and drip-pricing

In addition to fake reviews, provisions under the DMCCA also prohibit drip-pricing. Retailers are now required to give consumers the 'total' price of products/services upfront (including mandatory charges such as service fees and admin fees). Please see our full DMCCA article for further details.

The CMA are currently consulting on their draft guidance on the price transparency provisions under the DMCCA. The guidance details:

• what an invitation to purchase is;
• what pricing information needs to be included in an invitation to purchase (and how to avoid including ‘drip’ and ‘partitioned’ pricing);
• what traders need to do to ensure they are complying with the new requirements to provide the total price of the product in their invitations to purchase; and
• how the new requirements apply to specific types of charges and pricing practices and the steps that traders can take to ensure they are complying with the new requirements.

The consultation period ends on 08 September 2025. Businesses and retailers should be prepared to consider the implication of these obligations, and the changes required to their compliance programmes, online platforms and advertising practices.