Entrepreneur Steven Bartlett, known for his appearances on Dragon’s Den, has faced criticism from the Advertising Regulator for promoting businesses in which he has financial interests without disclosing his ties.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found two of Bartlett’s adverts for health companies Zoe and Huel to be misleading as they did not clarify his roles as an investor and director, respectively.
Misleading Advert for Zoe
The ASA’s investigation into a healthcare company, Zoe, revealed that Bartlett did not disclose his investment in the business when endorsing their product. The authority deemed this omission as significant information for consumers.
“Steven Bartlett was an investor in Zoe, which we considered was material to consumers’ understanding of the ad and relevant in making an informed decision about the product,” the ASA mentioned. They concluded the advert was misleading because it lacked transparency about Bartlett’s investment.
Misleading Claims for Huel
Bartlett also appeared in two paid-for Facebook ads for the nutrition brand Huel where he stated, “This is Huel’s best product”. The ASA argued that many consumers were unlikely to be aware of his financial interest as a director of the company.
“Because the ads omitted material information about Steven Bartlett’s position as a director at Huel, we concluded they were likely to mislead,” the ASA stated in their ruling. The ads were therefore found to be misleading.
Bartlett’s Influence
Bartlett is well-known for founding the Manchester-based agency, Social Chain, and has gained significant popularity as a voice for entrepreneurship.
His prominent presence on social media, with 3.5 million followers on Instagram and a podcast boasting 6 million subscribers, has amplified his influence among consumers.
Huel’s Defence
In response to the ASA’s findings, Huel defended that Bartlett is a well-known public figure, entrepreneur, and investor, and his relationship with the company had been publicly disclosed.
They emphasized his positive reception on BBC’s Dragon’s Den and that his investment in Huel had been announced on their website and YouTube channel, with media coverage to support it.
ASA’s Stand on Transparency
The ASA stands firm on its requirement for transparency in advertisements, highlighting that material information must be shared to avoid misleading consumers.
They stress that endorsements and adverts must clearly state any financial interests to maintain trust and honesty in advertising.
Impact on Bartlett’s Reputation
While Bartlett’s reputation as an entrepreneur remains significant, this incident brings a reminder about the importance of transparency.
As a public figure, maintaining trust through honest disclosures is critical for Bartlett’s relationship with his audience.
Conclusion
The ruling by the ASA underscores the importance of transparency in advertising and the responsibility of influencers like Bartlett to disclose any financial interests.
This incident serves as a crucial lesson in maintaining trust and honesty in business practices.
The ASA’s reprimand of Steven Bartlett for misleading adverts highlights the significance of transparency in endorsements and advertisements.
It serves as a reminder for public figures to maintain honesty and trust with their audience by disclosing any potential conflicts of interest in their promotions.