08-08-2025
Complaints upheld against influencer over incorrect ad disclosures and possible use of filters
THE ADVERTISING WATCHDOG has upheld several complaints against influencer Julie Haynes, including one that she used a filter while applying a skincare product.
The Advertising Standards Authority's (ASA) today
released its latest complaints bulletin
, and nine were upheld against Haynes, whose Instagram account handle is twins_and_me_.
Eight complaints were lodged against
various Instagram stories featuring
BPerfect Cosmetics
which were posted to the influencer's account.
Most of these stories featured discount codes.
The complainants considered that Haynes was using a filter while applying BPerfect products and that the filter impacted on how the product appeared on the skin, resulting in it being misleading.
Hayne's did not issue a response to the ASA but her agency stated that no filters had been used.
The ASA expressed concern at Hayne's failure to respond to the complaints and said advertisers should be able to provide evidence to substantiate all claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective.
It noted that evidence had not been received to demonstrate that a filter had not been used and that in the absence of such evidence, the content was in breach of the advertising code.
The complainants also said an incorrect commercial disclosure had been used in the Instagram stories and that in some cases, the size, location and colour of the font used meant that either the disclosure was partially or fully obscured.
Such labelling, including #ad or #gifted, is meant to be instantly recognisable, clear and prominent.
The complainants said that as a result, it was not clear that the stories were featuring commercial content.
Haynes did not respond and her agency said that they were Hayne's Talent Manager only and that all content goes through brand approval prior to posting.
Advertisement
The agency said that the videos had been marked as AD in line with standard disclosure practices.
The ASA however found that the disclosure didn't feature the # as required, nor was it the first word in any text block, which is also a requirement.
The Instagram stories also had the letters 'ba' before or after 'ad' in some content, which is not an approved disclosure.
The ASA also noted that in some cases, the font colour, size and placement of the disclosure minimised its visibility or fully obscured it.
In the absence of a response from Haynes, the ASA deemed that the advertising was likely to mislead consumers about the nature of the content.
The ASA ruled that the advertising should not reappear in that manner and reminded all parties to ensure that commercial content was disclosed correctly.
Haynes also found herself the subject of a complaint regarding a
product by
Estrid Studios AB
which also featured on her Instagram stories.
They said it was not immediately obvious that they were advertisements, taking account of the size and position of the disclosures.
The disclosures were also incorrect, as #AD did not come first in a block of text.
In the Instagram stories, '@heyestrid ad' appeared in the top right hand corner, when this should have been the other way round.
Haynes made no response to this complaint either.
The ASA again stressed that there is a 'onus on influencers to ensure that their advertising is in conformity with the Code'.
The ASA added that the font colour, size, and placement of the text boxes minimised their visibility.
The advertising watchdog concluded that the advert was likely to mislead consumers as to the nature of the content and was in breach of the code.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Learn More
Support The Journal
