ASA Ruling on The Disposable Vape Store

A TikTok post promoting The Disposable Vape Store, an e-cigarette shop, was challenged by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The post featured a man standing in front of shelves of e-cigarettes talking about a new product. UK regulations clearly prohibit online advertising of e-cigarettes but allow a manufacturer to provide factual product information such as the name, content and price of the product on its own websites. The ASA concluded that marketing communications with the direct or indirect effect of promoting nicotine-containing e-cigarettes and their components which were not licensed as medicines should not be made from a public TikTok account. The ASA explained that TikTok posts can be distributed beyond the followers of a particular account and therefore was not equivalent to actively seeking out information about e-cigarettes. Thus, public social media accounts, like TikTok, are not analogous to a website, and therefore, neither factual nor promotional content for e-cigarettes is permitted. The ASA ordered that the ad not appear again in the form complained about.

ASA Ruling on The Disposable Vape Store, Social media (own site), Complaint Ref: A23-1199005 (2023).

  • United Kingdom
  • Sep 13, 2023
  • Advertising Standards Authority
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff Unidentified complainant

Defendant The Disposable Vape Store

Legislation Cited

Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016

CAP Code

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

None

Type of Tobacco Product

"We considered whether TikTok was an online media space where such advertising, using factual claims only, was permitted. We understood that, while promotional content was prohibited on retailers’ own websites, rule 22.12 specified a particular exception that the provision of factual information was not prohibited. The basis of the exception to the rule was because consumers had to specifically seek out that factual information by visiting the website. The Guidance stated that, in principle, there was likely to be scope for the position relating to factual claims being acceptable on marketers’ websites, to apply to some social media activity. A social media page or account might be considered to be analogous to a website and able to make factual claims if it could only be found by those actively seeking it. We understood that public posts could be seen by anyone who visited the TikTok website on a web browser and by any users of the app. It was possible for public posts from a TikTok account to be distributed beyond those users who had signed up to follow the account due to TikTok’s algorithms and account settings. We considered that was consistent with content being pushed to consumers without having opted-in to receive the message it contained and therefore it was not equivalent to actively seeking out information about e-cigarettes. Given that characteristic, we considered that material from a public TikTok account was not analogous to a retailer’s own website and that material posted from such an account was therefore subject to the prohibition on advertising of unlicensed, nicotine-containing e-cigarettes, meaning that neither promotional nor factual content was permitted."