Marketing Matters | Review of September 2025

Welcome to this month's 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 August's ASA rulings.
• Other top ASA stories.
• CMA news for the same period.

ASA rulings – key takeaways for your A&M departments

In September, the ASA handed down 29 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 dates. September's rulings are therefore a mixed bag, using both the old and new rules.

Cracking down on greenwashing and green claims in the travel industry

In September alone, the ASA ruled against four separate cruise providers for misleading environmental claims and unsubstantiated environmental claims. The rulings form part of a wider piece of work by the ASA to combat greenwashing and green claims. All four of the ads were identified for investigation by the ASA's own intelligence gathering AI system, designed to monitor these types of claims.

One of the cruise providers was challenged for advertising that they had "introduced cutting-edge environmental technology, including an advanced LNG-powered engine" on their webpage which made their ship "one of the most eco-friendly cruise ships afloat”. The word "eco-friendly" was hyperlinked which took consumers to a website titled "Eco-Friendly Cruises” which, in turn, stated "the cruise industry has made giant leaps over the past decade to reduce its environmental impact. Recycling, incinerating and waste processing are now the norm, not the exception. Green tech is also being installed on new ships and retrofitted on older ones". The ad was challenged for giving a misleading impression to consumers about the environmental impact of travel via cruise ships.

The second ruling against a cruise provider concerned a webpage advertising artwork by a German artist who had won a competition to design the hull. The artwork, comprising abstract imagery of marine life, was entitled "#SaveTheSea". Text beneath the title read "showcasing the line’s commitment to environmental responsibility” and again highlighted the providers eco-friendly technology and use of LNG technology which was advertised as the "cleanest marine fuel".

The third cruise provider was also challenged for stating LNG was the "world’s cleanest marine fuel” and for advertising its use of "green technologies" on its website. The ASA challenged, and ultimately upheld the challenge, noting that the overall impression of the ad was that they were providing a greener alternative and consumers would be lessening their impact on the environment by choosing to travel on the relevant ship over other cruise companies.

The latest ruling against a cruise provider, in September 2025, concerned a paid-for Google ad for a travel agency, which stated “Celebrity Cruises. A Strong Focus On Sustainability And Eco-friendly Practices”.

In all four cases, the ASA noted that under the CAP Code the basis of environmental claims, and comparative claims, must be clear. Additionally, any unqualified claims could mislead if they omit material information. The ASA highlighted that consumers are becoming increasingly concerned with the environmental impact of activities related to higher-carbon services, such as cruising, and would be interested in seeking out operators that were making an effort to decrease the environmental impact of the holidays they provided. Ads that exaggerated the eco-friendly and environmental impact of their cruises were considered likely to mislead consumers.

Further, the ASA emphasised that any environmental claims must be supported by a high-level of substantiation and based on the full life cycle of the advertised product (unless expressly stated otherwise).

In relation to the second and third provider listed above, the ASA considered the claims made to be absolute claims that the technology used to power the relevant cruise ship would not be harmful to the environment at any point in its life cycle. The provider was unable to provide the basis of the claims made and it was noted that LNG technology was a fossil fuel that primarily comprised of methane, producing CO2 and other greenhouse gases. It was considered that whilst LNG technology may produce lower levels of CO2 emissions than conventional diesel when burned, the production and use of LNG would still result in the release of that gas into the atmosphere throughout its life cycle, which was making a substantial contribution to climate change.

AI generated content

A betting site was challenged for an ad which featured an AI generated video depicting a Liverpool footballer giving a speech. The video in question did state "ai-generated parody" and the company replies to their own X post with a comment which read "AI-generated parody […] All voices / likenesses are fictional […] Not endorsed or real players/managers […] Safer gambling: 18+ […] BeGambleAware”. The ad received 2 complaints challenging whether the video included a person or character who was likely to be a strong appeal to under-18s.

The company submitted a response that rebutted that the video should even be considered as 'marketing communication'. They stated that the X post contained no odds, inducements, calls to action, product references, or links to their betting website and was intended to be a piece of content on typical football humour. Further, it was editorial in nature and was not intended to sell anything or drive traffic to their betting platform.

The ASA were quick to clarify that the video was considered a 'marketing communication'. The CAP Code applies to “advertisements and other marketing communications by or from companies, organisations or sole traders on their own websites, or in other non-paid-for space online under their control, that [were] directly connected with the supply or transfer of goods, services, opportunities and gifts, or which consist[ed] of direct solicitations of donations as part of their own fund-raising activities”. The ASA noted that the X post appeared in a non-paid space online and was in the company's control. In relation to whether the post was directly connected with the supply of betting services, the ASA flagged:

• the video appeared when the AI-generated footballer was being transferred to another team;
• the company offered bets on football matches;
• the post included the 18+ and BeGambleAware messaging; and
• the post featured the advertiser's logo embedded into the video.

The ASA, therefore, considered the purpose of the post was to promote the brand through creating a viral video and, in light of the prominent Midnight branding and Gambling Aware message, that it had featured a direct reference to gambling. The ASA ruled the video directly connected with the supply of betting services and was an ad falling within the scope of the CAP Code.

The ASA considered that the AI-generated footballer was well-known and although not the 'real' player himself, the imagery was a depiction of that specific player and consumers would have clearly recognised the video as being him. Essentially, the AI-generated imagery made no different to the ASA's ruling to what would have been ruled if the real footballer had recorded the video. In light of these consideration, the ASA ruled that the ad was irresponsible and a breach of the CAP Code as the X protection policies for under 18 users, at the time, were unlikely to effectively identify all accounts that had falsely claimed to be over 18 and the ad was a strong appeal to children due to its use of a 'star' footballer.

It is worth noting that retailers and A&M Teams should be careful when using AI-generated content, not merely for the above reasons, but because there are additional intellectual property and identity theft considerations when using another's identify/voice/image without their permission.

Takeaways

The key takeaways from the ASA rulings this month are:

• The ASA's continued battle greenwashing / green ads: Be prepared to substantiate claims with a high-level of detail/information and base any green claims on a whole life cycle (or clearly state the part they apply to).
• Take care when using AI-generated content: The ASA is likely to differentiate between real and AI-generated marketing communications, as the same rules apply.

Top ASA stories last month

New CAP guidance on influencer marketing

Influencer marketing on social media is a significant aspect of the retail and consumer industry, and continues to boom. More retailers are using influencers to market their brand, products and services with many still making the same pitfall errors. In an effort to clarify the rules, the ASA has recently published guidance on the matter.

The key points are summarised briefly below:

1. Disclosure is vital: Consumers have the right to know when they are being advertised to. The disclosure cannot be 'hidden' (i.e. only appears when consumers interact with the ad) and #gifted, #aff or affiliated, or #Iworkwith them have all be ruled as inadequate. The ASA will considers two elements when determining if disclosure is required (i) payment (which includes free gifts, money, referral code payments and discounts) and (ii) editorial content (which is where a brand has any control over the post and can depend on whether a brand has final approval, the right to edit, provides a script or a specific slogan/hashtag to use).
2. It doesn't end with disclosure; all the usual CAP Code rules will apply.

Recent CMA activity

An update on the Ticketmaster case

On 15 September 2025, virtual ticket company, Ticketmaster, signed undertakings following concerns relating to the Oasis ticket sales. Undertakings are one of the new enforcement powers of the CMA under the new DMCCA legislation (Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024). Ticketmaster have committed to:

• telling fans 24 hours in advance if a tiered pricing system is being used;
• provide more information about ticket prices during online queues, helping fans anticipate how much they might have to pay; and
• report to the CMA regularly over the next 2 years.

Read the full formal commitments here.

Further DMCCA guidance for businesses

Whilst the CMA reviews responses to its consultation into price transparency/price dripping (further details here), it has released further guidance to support businesses and retailers navigate the changes brought in by the DMCCA.

Amongst the guidance, the following have been flagged to businesses as useful sources:

• Their local Trading Standards Service;
• The CTSI Business Campion; and
• The ASA/CAP 'Advice for Businesses' website.

If your organisation is looking for support in navigating the effect of the DMCCA provisions, please contact a member of our team below.