On 30 October 2024, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) reaffirmed its commitment to responsible advertising by upholding a ruling against claims made about an anti-ageing serum. The product, advertised as able to reverse visible signs of sun damage, was criticised for potentially downplaying the importance of sun protection.
A product’s presentation plays a key role in its compliance. As per Art. 20 of the EU Cosmetics Regulations, evidence must be provided to support all claims made for cosmetics, regardless of whether they appear on the product label, online platforms, or in advertisements. Additionally, compliance with Regulation 655/2013, establishing the common criteria for cosmetic claims is required.
Advertising claims and public health concerns
The ruling focused on two advertisements, one broadcast on television and the other accessible through Video on Demand (VOD), which promoted the serum. Both advertisements depicted a woman reminiscing about her past negligence in using sunscreen, with statements such as, “Can’t believe we didn’t always use sunscreen” and “We were too busy having fun.” The serum was then presented as a remedy, with claims including, “Clinically proven to reverse visible signs of sun damage,” accompanied by brief on-screen text advising, “Recommended with daily SPF usage.”
Despite this disclaimer, the ASA received multiple complaints arguing that the ads conveyed that sunscreen was not essential, as the product could retrospectively address sun damage. This sparked concerns about the implications for public health, particularly given the established links between unprotected sun exposure and skin cancer.
The advertiser’s defence
The advertiser defended the ads by emphasising their intent to raise awareness of sun damage and its cosmetic effects. They pointed out that:
- The ads were based on consumer research, which revealed gaps in awareness about the cumulative effects of UV exposure and its role in skin ageing.
- The scenes depicted moderate sun exposure, avoiding settings like beaches or pools to reflect real-life situations where sunscreen is often overlooked.
- The ad’s disclaimers underscored the importance of using SPF alongside the serum, aiming to promote responsible skincare habits.
The advertiser also highlighted its commitment to sun safety, including partnerships with cancer charities and staff training initiatives to educate consumers about sunscreen use.
ASA’s assessment
The ASA acknowledged the context of the ads’ narrative and the advertiser’s efforts to clarify the role of sunscreen in skin health. However, it found that the ads’ tone was overly casual about the risks of sun damage.
While the disclaimer recommending daily SPF use was noted, its brief appearance and placement at the beginning of the ad were deemed insufficient to counterbalance the overall message. The ASA concluded that the ads condoned irresponsible behaviour by downplaying the necessity of sun protection.
A broader conversation on sun safety
The ASA’s decision aligns with global efforts to combat skin cancer and promote awareness of UV safety. While skincare products like anti-ageing serums play a role in addressing cosmetic concerns, they cannot replace the protective benefits of sunscreen. Advertisers have a duty to communicate these distinctions clearly, ensuring their messages do not inadvertently encourage risky behaviours.
This ruling protects consumers and sends a strong signal to the beauty and skincare industry about the ethical boundaries of marketing.
Do you have any questions on compliance of cosmetics in the EU, UK, or US? Contact us here and write an email to COSlaw@obelis.net.
References
ASA. (2024). Ruling on The Boots Company PLC. Retrieved on 1 December 2024.
Leave a Reply