The Advertising Standards Authority has investigated Reach regional website Hull Live over social posts not being clearly marked as sponsored content.
The complaint was one of several since 2019 in relation to a similar issue at Hull Live and the ASA said it has received assurances from Reach that action will be taken to prevent a further repeat.
The case related to a sponsored article published on Hull Live in September about a live-in carer service called Helping Hands Home Care.
The website article was clearly marked as an “advertising feature from Helping Hands” but there was no identification on the relevant Facebook or X (formerly Twitter) posts.
An addition like #ad or #spon is usually sufficient to clearly mark social posts as paid-for advertising.
The ASA told the complainant, in an email seen by Press Gazette, that it has “received a very clear assurance from Reach that they will take action to ensure unlabelled posts do not appear again in future.
“While we have been willing to close this case without further action based on Reach’s assurance, I can assure you that we have made it very clear to them that they do need to address this situation once and for all.”
Press Gazette understands the error was blamed on a software issue that has since been fixed and that Hull Live is no longer using the relevant platform to post on X.
In 2019 the ASA similarly informally resolved a complaint about half a dozen Hull Live tweets that were not signposted as advertorials.
Several tweets posted in 2021 were then found to be “likely” in breach of ASA rules but the watchdog again informally resolved the complaint as Reach promised to put in place measures for clear labelling.
Of the latest case, an ASA spokesperson told Press Gazette: “We received a complaint about a Facebook post and X post, both from Hull Live, about a live-in carer service provided by Helping Hands Home Care. Both posts linked to an advertorial for Helping Hands on hulldailymail.co.uk. A complainant challenged whether the posts were obviously identifiable as ads.
“After contacting them about the complaint, Midshires Care Ltd and Reach plc both assured us that similar unlabelled posts would not be posted or published in the future. They also told us that they had removed the posts. On that basis, we resolved the case informally.
“To clarify why the case was resolved informally, if it appears that an ad may have breached the advertising rules, we will consider the matter against our prioritisation principles to decide what resource we should commit, or what activity we should undertake in response.
“Informal rulings often benefit both complainants and advertisers as they ensure matters are resolved quickly and effectively, without the need for a formal investigation.”
The ASA’s prioritisation principles include considering what harm or detriment might occur as a result of the ad, balancing the risk of taking action versus inaction, considering the likely impact of intervention, and considering what resource would be proportionate to the problem.
The complainant told Press Gazette they went to the ASA “because there has been a pattern of behaviour by Hull Live and the wider Reach plc network that to date the ASA has yet to address”.
They added that they felt the ASA’s response was “superficial and meagre; whilst they accept that Reach has been in this boat several times before, they’re are still eager to eagerly accept Reach’s assurances that it ‘won’t happen again’ despite them saying that several times before”.
Reach declined to comment.
Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog
