ASA Dismisses Complaint against Coral Digivan Ad in Cheltenham  

The UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has evaluated a somewhat controversial ad promoting the products of betting operator Coral. However, the ASA decided that the billboard ad did not violate its rules.

The advert in question was mounted on a digital billboard on a parked van in Cheltenham. It was published ahead of the Cheltenham Festival, one of the biggest horse racing events in the UK and featured the slogan “THE HEAD TO TOE TWEEDERS; WE’RE HERE FOR IT; CORAL.”

As it became clear, this was one of eight such mobile digital billboards that were deployed on each day of the festival. The authority learned that they focused mostly on the primary route between the racecourse and the town center.

While the ad was not offensive in any way, one complainant, was unhappy with it, arguing that one of the vans had been parked close to two schools.

Coral Said It Tried to Stay as Far Away from Schools as Possible

In its response, Coral argued that the so-called digivans had been instructed to stay, where possible, at least 2200 meters away from schools. However, Coral also noted that the mobile format of the ads meant that limited parking spaces could sometimes cause the digivans to be within 200 meters of a school.

To further justify its point, the operator provided a map of the digivans’ locations. It clarified that they had been instructed to park facing the direction of travel of people making their way to the racecourse in the morning and away from schools. During racing, the vans were moved closer to the center and near the racecourse’s entrance.

Finally, following the conclusion of the races, the vans were once again parked facing the direction of travel of people going to the racecourse. Furthermore, the digivans were scheduled to be live from 9 am to 5 pm, meaning that students would have been already at school and wouldn’t have been exposed to the ads.

Coral noted that once it became aware of the complaint, it contacted its media partners and agencies, telling them to abide by the 200-meter guidance whenever possible during future campaigns.

The operator concluded that it had received no complaints directly in relation to the campaign.

The ASA Did Not Uphold the Complaint

The ASA evaluated the facts and decided not to uphold the complaint. Following Coral’s clarifications, the ASA agreed that the ad did not violate the CAP Code and was in no way targeting children.

The authority confirmed that it assessed the locations of the digivans provided by Coral, which correlated with the details in the complaint. Despite being likely to be seen by minors, the digivans’ morning locations were far enough away from secondary schools.

On one occasion, a van was within 150 meters of a primary school but provided no direct line of sight from the school grounds to the digivan.  

We therefore concluded the placement of the digivans, and the subsequent display of their ads, did not breach the Code. We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.3 (Compliance), 16.1, 16.3 and 16.3.13 (Gambling), but did not find it in breach.

ASA statement

The ASA, however, did end up removing an earlier Cheltenham festival ad, which featured a popular OnlyFans model.