Ad description
A promoted tweet for bet365, seen in January 2024, contained an image
that featured boxer Chris Eubank Jr. The ⚾️ caption stated, “It’s fight week! Chris Eubank
Jr and Liam Smith will be Unleashed in Manchester. Click here for latest
⚾️ odds”.
Issue
Response
The ASA challenged whether the ad included an individual who was
likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s, and ⚾️ therefore breached the Code.
Hillside
(UK Sports) ENC t/a bet365 said that their social media channels were age-gated to
users who ⚾️ were 18 years and over. They explained that where a platform did not have
robust age verification methods in place, ⚾️ bet365’s targeted campaigns were only served
to users identified as 25 years and over and had relative interests. Bet365 said ⚾️ that
all social media channels had exclusion lists, so that users who were identified as
self-excluded or at a higher ⚾️ risk of gambling related harm did not receive targeted
content.
Bet365 said they had developed robust processes which included reviewing all
⚾️ individuals and content across all of their UK marketing channels. They said that an
independent compliance team at bet365 carried ⚾️ out the reviews, and that all reviews
were documented and compiled using ASA guidelines. They said that individuals or
content ⚾️ deemed to be of high risk would not be used in marketing communications. bet365
also explained that they conducted ongoing ⚾️ live monitoring of individuals used in their
marketing communications to ensure that they were not of high risk after appearing ⚾️ in
an ad. They stated that people with inherent strong appeal, such as European top flight
footballers, were automatically excluded ⚾️ from their marketing.
Regarding the complaint,
bet365 said that the ad was only displayed to users aged 25 and over and ⚾️ to individuals
who had displayed interest in relevant content. bet365 stated that they had carried out
a risk assessment of ⚾️ Chris Eubank Jr against the CAP guidance on gambling and lotteries
advertising and were satisfied to a high degree that ⚾️ the ad did not have appeal to
under-18s.
They explained that Chris Eubank Jr was 33 years old and was best ⚾️ known for
being a professional boxer in the Middleweight and Super-Middleweight divisions. They
said that as per CAP’s guidance, he ⚾️ was deemed as having low or moderate risk, since
boxing was an adult-oriented sport, and that he did not have ⚾️ appeal to under-18s in the
context of his profile within the sport.
Bet365 acknowledged that Chris Eubank Jr had
appeared on ⚾️ Celebrity Gogglebox, but said they had deemed that appearance as being of
low risk because the programme was aired after ⚾️ 9pm and because he had made brief
appearances in the programme alongside his father, Chris Eubank.
bet365 also noted a
previous ⚾️ ASA Ruling had concluded that Celebrity Gogglebox was “primarily aimed at an
adult audience”, and was unlikely to have resulted ⚾️ in a significant change in an
individual’s level of appeal to under-18s. bet365 said that for the same reasons, they
⚾️ did not deem Chris Eubank Jr’s appearance on the programme to be a reason for under-18s
to watch it, and ⚾️ that they did not deem him to have strong appeal as a result of
appearing on the programme.
bet365 said that ⚾️ as per CAP guidance, boxing was a more
adult-oriented sport. They said that they had assessed Chris Eubank Jr’s social ⚾️ media
profiles prior to publishing the ad. They provided details of his audience demographics
on social media which showed that ⚾️ on Facebook, 0.1% of his followers were registered as
under 18. On Twitter, 0.3% of his followers were registered as ⚾️ under 18, and on
Instagram 0.4% were registered as under 18, and said this demonstrated that he had low
risk ⚾️ in appealing to under-18s. They said that he did not have a public account on
YouTube. They also provided data ⚾️ for his followers on TikTok that showed that of his
21,300 followers, 31.7% were registered as under 18. They said, ⚾️ however, that bet365
did not have a profile or presence on that platform and therefore none of his followers
would ⚾️ see any bet365 content. They also said the majority of his followers were split
across Twitter, Facebook and Instagram and ⚾️ of his total follower count, 0.6% were
registered as under 18.
They also provided the BARB viewing data for the Chris ⚾️ Eubank
Jr and Liam Smith boxing match that showed of the 345,000 viewers, there were no
under-24s who had watched ⚾️ it. The data also showed the largest demographic of viewers
were aged between 35 and 54. Bet365 also provided the ⚾️ viewing data for the fight which
was uploaded on YouTube. It showed that 0.5% of viewers were registered as under ⚾️ 18 and
that the largest demographic of viewers were aged between 25 and 44.
They said all ads
were also risk ⚾️ assessed on a case-by-case basis. bet365 said that they were confident
that Chris Eubank Jr, and therefore the ad, did ⚾️ not have a strong appeal to
under-18s.
Twitter said that the promoted tweet was not in breach of Twitter’s Ad
Policies. ⚾️ They confirmed that they had not received any complaints about the ad. They
said that in the event the complaint ⚾️ was upheld, the ad would be
removed.
Assessment
Not upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications for
gambling products must not be ⚾️ likely to be of strong appeal to children or young
persons, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture. ⚾️ They must not
include a person or character whose example was likely to be followed by those aged
under 18 ⚾️ years or who had strong appeal to those aged under 18. The ASA expected
advertisers to provide evidence that they ⚾️ had identified what persons or characters
were generally known for outside the context of an ad, and had used appropriate ⚾️ sources
of data and information to assess their likely level of appeal to under-18s. Because
the ad had appeared in ⚾️ a medium where under-18s could not be entirely excluded from the
audience it needed to comply with that rule.
The ASA ⚾️ noted that sportspeople involved
in clearly adult-oriented sports who were ‘notable’ stars with significant social media
and general profiles which ⚾️ made them well-known to under-18s were considered of
‘moderate risk’ within the CAP guidance “Gambling and lotteries: Protecting under-18s”
in ⚾️ terms of how likely they were to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
Chris Eubank Jr
was a current professional boxer, ⚾️ and the ad focused specifically on his upcoming
boxing match against Liam Smith. We considered that boxing was an adult-oriented ⚾️ sport
and was unlikely to be of inherent strong appeal to under-18s. The BARB viewing data
and the viewing data ⚾️ on YouTube for the boxing match also showed that the majority of
viewers were adults, and we did not consider ⚾️ the event itself likely to appeal strongly
to under-18s.
We also considered how likely it was that Chris Eubank Jr would ⚾️ appeal
strongly to under-18s based on his social media and general profiles. He had a large
following on social media, ⚾️ including Instagram and Facebook, which totalled over 1.7
million followers, and had appeared on Celebrity Gogglebox in 2024. Most of ⚾️ his
followers on social media were split across Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. In total,
he had 10,905 followers who were ⚾️ registered as under 18 from the 1.7 million followers
across social media, which did not suggest a strong appeal to ⚾️ those who were under
18.On TikTok, 31.7% of his followers were registered as under 18. We considered there
was a ⚾️ risk in including figures in gambling ads who had an account on TikTok and who
had a large number of ⚾️ followers who were under 18. However, the total number of his
followers (of all ages) on that platform was around ⚾️ 21,000, compared to the total of
over 1.7 million across all of the platforms. We considered the number of under-18
⚾️ followers on TikTok was not significant in absolute terms, and did not imply strong
appeal to under-18s more generally.We noted ⚾️ that Celebrity Gogglebox had been broadcast
after 9 pm and we considered that it was primarily aimed at an adult ⚾️ audience. We also
noted that his appearance in the show was limited and that he only appeared for a few
⚾️ minutes over the programme’s season in 2024. We considered that his appearance on the
show was unlikely to have resulted ⚾️ in a change in his level of appeal to
under-18s.
Lastly, we considered that there was nothing in the way he ⚾️ was presented in
the ad that would have strongly attracted the attention of under-18s or was likely to
render him ⚾️ of strong appeal.Given the above factors, we therefore concluded that the ad
was not of strong appeal to children or ⚾️ young persons.
We investigated the ad under CAP
Code (Edition 12) rules 16.1, 16.3 and 16.3.12 (Gambling), but did not find ⚾️ it in
breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
More on
