The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) Decides To Not Uphold Complaint About Nickelodeon UK And Weetabix Limited's "Weetabix World" Website On Nick.co.uk

The business law news website Lexology is reporting the Nickelodeon UK news that the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), a self-regulatory organisation (SRO) of the advertising industry in the United Kingdom, has decided to not uphold a complaint recently made about Weetabix Limited's "Weetabix World" minisite on the official Nickelodeon UK website, which contained advergames that targeted children and featured various Weetabix/Weetos products, about concerns that visitors to Nick.co.uk may not have known the "Weetabix World" website was a advertisement, agreeing with Weetabix Ltd. and Nick UK that the part of the website called "Weetabix World" and that the Weetabix branding on that part of the website was much more prominent than the Nickelodeon logo. The ASA took the view that, due to the prominence of the relevant Weetabix branding, the games were clearly identifiable as marketing communications from Weetabix:

7. Weetabix Ltd, 13 February 2013

In the WeetaKid app players controlled the WeetaKid character and were prompted to make their character “eat” Weetabix for extra energy by scanning a QR code on a Weetabix pack. If the user did not have access to a Weetabix box to scan the QR code in-app messages such as “No Weetabix? Disaster! Don’t make things harder for yourself!” appeared.

The Weetos and Nickelodeon websites between them contained 14 advergames that targeted children and featured various Weetabix/Weetos products.

Complaint/Decision

Professor Agnes Nairn and the Family and Parenting Institute complained on four grounds:

i) The WeetaKid app exploited the vulnerability of children by making them feel inferior or unpopular for not buying a product.

Weetabix said that the WeetaKid app had been designed so that it could be played without purchasing the product. It also suggested that game users disassociated what happened in games from the real world and argued that children would not associate the WeetaKid’s consumption of Weetabix in the game with their own consumption of the product. The ASA upheld this part of the complaint and disagreed that the app remained wholly fantastical because the user had to scan a QR code on a Weetabix pack in order to make their in-app character “eat” Weetabix. The ASA also held that the language of the prompts could cause children to understand that they were failing if they did not eat Weetabix and concluded that the app therefore exploited children’s credulity and vulnerability.

ii) The WeetaKid app included a direct exhortation to children to buy an advertised product.

Weetabix stated that the game mentioned Weetabix but pointed out that having a Weetabix box was not a prerequisite for playing the game. It further argued that the app did not require players to purchase packs of Weetabix. The ASA did not uphold this part of the complaint and, whilst acknowledging that some in-app messages referred to Weetabix, took the view that the messages did not exhort users to purchase Weetabix.

iii) The advergames on the Weetos and Nickelodeon websites were obviously identifiable as marketing communications.

Weetabix stated that the logos of the relevant Weetabix brands were prominently displayed on both websites; the games featured its products and there were also prominent links to TV ads for the products. It suggested it was clear that the games were Weetabix marketing communications. The ASA did not uphold this part of the complaint. In relation to a Weetos advergame, the ASA considered that references to the Weetos brand in combination with the Weetabix company name made it sufficiently obvious that it was a marketing communication from Weetabix. In relation to the advergames on the Nickelodeon website, the ASA referred to the fact that the games featured on part of the website called “Weetabix World” and that the Weetabix branding on that part of the website was much more prominent than the Nickelodeon logo. The ASA took the view that, due to the prominence of the relevant Weetabix branding, the games were clearly identifiable as marketing communications from Weetabix.

iv) The Weetos games advertised Weetos Bars, which would be classed as a product high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) and therefore condoned or encouraged poor nutritional habits or unhealthy lifestyles in children.

Weetabix pointed out that the only Weetos product shown in any of the games was Weetos cereal, which was not an HFSS product. Weetabix stated that Weetos Bars did not feature in any of the games and was not advertised by association. The ASA accepted this and took the view that the games did not advertise Weetos Bars by association. Whilst the ASA accepted that none of the games featured Weetos Bars, it did consider that the product was referred to in ads on the Nickelodeon website, but took the view that the ads did not condone or encourage poor nutritional habits or unhealthy lifestyles in children because the bars were referred to as a “treat”.

This is the second significant adjudication relating to Weetabix in as many months, having been subject to complaints in January 2013 that its adverts for cereal Weetos promoted poor nutritional habits and an unhealthy lifestyle in children. Similar complaints this month were again not upheld, but it is perhaps not surprising that complaints in relation to the cereal company’s WeetaKid app were upheld. Advertisers must take care not to include anything in their advertisements that might risk invoking feelings of inferiority or being unpopular in children as it may be found to exploit their inexperience and vulnerability. We are also seeing a significant increase in complaints relating to advergames targeting children, so advertisers should take particular care to adhere to the CAP code in any advergames.