Former footballers Matt Le Tissier and John Hartson broke UK advertising rules by posting promotional tweets about a cannabidiol (CBD) product without telling consumers they were being paid by its retailer, the industry watchdog has said.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) investigated complaints about a number of posts on X, formerly known as Twitter, promoting Supreme CBD, a company set up by former boxer Anthony Fowler.
In two tweets Hartson, a former “brand ambassador” for Supreme CBD, told his 400,000 followers that the product was “magic” and “believe me they help you sleep so much better with less anxiety”.
A tweet with an embedded video by Le Tissier, a current brand ambassador, told his 650,000 followers that he had been sceptical of the company but that “it’s honestly a game changer for people with anxiety/depression any aches/pain or insomnia”.
CBD products have exploded in popularity in the UK in recent years, from packs of “gummies” to fizzy drinks.
The posts by both Hartson and Le Tissier offered discount codes for consumers who wanted to purchase CBD products, but did not clarify their relationship with Supreme CBD or make clear that the tweets were advertisements.
The ASA investigated the posts for not making clear their commercial nature as well as for making the claim that the product could “prevent, treat or cure disease”, which is against the UK marketing code.
Supreme CBD said it did not have a commercial relationship with Hartson despite admitting there was a verbal agreement that he would receive a “small amount of commission” from the use of his discount codes, as well as some free products.
Hartson told the ASA he had used the product in a personal capacity, which then translated to becoming a brand ambassador, and that Supreme CBD used his account to post tweets directly to tap his “substantial social following”. Supreme CBD said it was not responsible for Hartson’s tweets.
Hartson said he received “small remuneration payments” as part of a verbal agreement.
Following the ASA investigation, Hartson amended the tweets, withdrew the facility for posts to be made on his behalf and said he was no longer working with Supreme CBD.
The company said Le Tissier was an affiliate and received commission from his personalised code, in another verbal arrangement.
Le Tissier said he was unaware that talking about the benefits of the products would be unacceptable, adding that he would ensure to make future posts identifiable as marketing and not mention medical benefits.
However, the post banned by the ASA remains pinned at the top of his X feed.
I’ve been very sceptical of a lot of things including @supreme_cbd when it was first recommended to me, but it’s honestly a game changer for people with anxiety/depression any aches/pain or insomnia, my followers can save 40% with code Tiss40 at checkout https://t.co/p71KDBCVgg pic.twitter.com/Y209PqDlGa
— Matt Le Tissier (@mattletiss7) May 15, 2023
The ASA said the advertising code states that marketing communications must be obviously identifiable, such as by including the term #ad.
“The ASA understood that there was a financial agreement in place between Supreme CBD and both Mr Hartson and Mr Le Tissier, and that they both received commission for sales generated from the use of their personalised codes by consumers,” the watchdog said. “Those personalised codes were therefore directly connected with the supply of goods provided by Supreme CBD, and because of that [the] posts were considered ads.”
The ASA also said that the pair were featured in an “ambassadors section” on the Supreme CBD website, including links to buy their “product of choice”, which the watchdog said made it likely “there would be an expectation they would be positive about the brand”.
A tweet by Supreme CBD founder Fowler was also deemed to have broken the advertising code.
“We told Supreme CBD, Anthony Fowler, John Hartson and Matt Le Tissier to ensure their future ads were obviously identifiable as marketing communications,” the ASA said. “We also told them to ensure their future ads did not state or imply that the products could prevent, treat or cure human disease.”
