ASA Clarifies Enforcement of Less Healthy Food Advertising Rules in Recent Rulings

Earlier this year, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) began enforcing new restrictions on advertising less healthy food and drink products (LHF products) in the UK. Initial rulings provided early guidance on how the regulator intends to apply these rules in practice. Recently, the ASA published six additional rulings that offer further insight into its enforcement approach, revealing some unexpected outcomes.

A particularly notable decision involved the yellow cartoon M&M character. Mars contended that its Instagram post promoted the M&M's brand generally rather than a specific product. However, the ASA concluded that consumers would identify the distinctive yellow, oval-shaped character as representing Peanut M&M's, an identifiable less healthy food product. This ruling reinforces the ASA’s position that it will focus on the impression created by an advertisement and consumer recognition, rather than solely on the advertiser’s stated intent.

In contrast, complaints against advertisements featuring Domino's pizzas, KFC chicken products, and a Burger King Whopper were not upheld. The ASA accepted evidence demonstrating that the specific products shown did not meet the Government’s nutrient profiling criteria for less healthy foods. For example, Domino's successfully showed that its Vegi Supreme pizza on a classic crust was not classified as less healthy, despite other variations of the same pizza potentially falling within the restrictions. Similarly, KFC defended complaints related to a Fillet Burger, Pepsi Max, and Mini Fillets by proving these items were outside the less healthy classification. Papa John’s also demonstrated that the pizza featured in its Facebook advertisement did not fall under the regime.

These rulings highlight the ASA’s willingness to examine products at a granular level and the importance for advertisers to maintain clear, robust nutrient profiling assessments and supporting evidence for individual menu items and product variants.

The ASA has consistently emphasized that paid-for social media content is subject to the advertising restrictions. The recent decisions reaffirm this stance, underscoring the need for businesses using influencers to address compliance at every stage—from briefing and content creation to approval and publication. This is particularly critical given the ASA’s demonstrated readiness to scrutinize social media advertising closely, as seen in both earlier Lidl rulings and the latest decisions.

The new restrictions place special emphasis on paid online advertising, and the ASA’s rulings underline the broad scope of their application. One significant case involved an Uber Eats video-on-demand advertisement featuring a Burger King Whopper. This ruling illustrates that the rules may apply not only to manufacturers and restaurant operators but also to delivery platforms and other intermediaries involved in promoting food products online.

Consequently, businesses should ensure compliance reviews encompass all forms of paid digital advertising, including paid social campaigns, display ads, and sponsored content.

Importantly, the ASA’s latest rulings provide reassurance that complaints will not automatically succeed simply because an advertisement relates to a well-known fast-food or takeaway brand. The restrictions apply only to products that fall within specified categories of less healthy foods and meet the nutrient profiling criteria.

As enforcement activity intensifies, advertisers are advised to adopt a proactive approach to compliance. This includes maintaining detailed nutrient profiling documentation, reviewing all paid digital advertising content carefully, and ensuring that influencer campaigns adhere strictly to the rules.

Overall, the ASA’s recent rulings confirm that the restrictions on advertising less healthy foods are entering a more active enforcement phase, with a clear focus on the substance of advertising and the consumer’s likely perception.