Gambling, alcohol, and influencers: ASA clarifies the rules in LEBOM decision

Summary

On 2 July 2025, the Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”) upheld complaints that two betting advertisements (“ads”) displayed on two social media platforms for sports betting app, LEBOM, had encouraged socially irresponsible gambling behaviour and excessive drinking and, as such, the ads breached the UK Code of Non-broadcasting Advertising (“CAP Code”).

Background

The ruling related to two paid-for social media ads seen in April 2025, both promoting LEBOM, a sports betting app that offers gambling products with shared social experiences (“App”). Both ads featured a video of internet personality, Mashtag Brady.

In one of the ads, Mashtag Brady and his friends were portrayed demonstrating how the App worked, whilst consuming alcohol, accompanied by a comment from Mashtag Brady in which he said, “let’s get pissed.” Additionally, the ad featured segments where Mashtag Brady discussed a “forfeit” for the individual who ranked last on the group’s leaderboard within the App, as well as a prize pot for the winner. The ad continued by showcasing the group celebrating the winner of the prize while continuing to drink, with the losing individual walking through the bar in their underwear. The ad concluded with Mashtag Brady encouraging viewers to download the App.

In the other ad, Mashtag Brady similarly promoted the app alongside drinking shots, celebrating, and completing a forfeit, whilst stating “Let’s go get absolutely f***** up”.

Two complainants challenged whether the ads: (1) portrayed, condoned, or encouraged gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible; and (2) encouraged excessive drinking and were therefore irresponsible.

Decision

The ASA upheld both complaints against LEBOM for breaching the following provisions of the CAP Code:

• 16.1: Marketing communications for gambling must be socially responsible;
• 16.3: Marketing communications must not:
  • 16.3.1: portray, condone or encourage gambling behaviour that is socially irresponsible or could lead to financial, social or emotional harm;
  • 16.3.6: suggest that gambling can enhance personal qualities, for example, that it can improve self-image or self-esteem, or is a way to gain control, superiority, recognition or admiration; and
• 18.1: Marketing communications must be socially responsible and must contain nothing that is likely to lead people to adopt styles of drinking that are unwise. For example, they should not encourage excessive drinking

Whilst LEBOM argued that the App was different to other gambling products, because it provided a shared social experience and contained certain in-built safeguards, the ASA considered that the ads irresponsibly linked gambling with improved recognition or self-esteem. The ASA determined that the ‘winner’ within the ads appeared to be praised by the group, while the ‘loser’ was mocked. LEBOM submitted that the segments showing the ‘loser’ committing a forfeit were intended to show that that there was always a loser on LEBOM and to responsibly reflect the reality of gambling. The ASA noted these arguments, however, deemed the ads to go further than just showing the emotion associated with losing. The celebration for the winner and the embarrassment for the loser created an impression that the winner, who had the most success gambling, was to be admired, whereas the loser was to be looked down upon.

The ASA also determined that the ads encouraged excessive drinking. LEBOM previously stated that the references to alcohol within the ads were incidental, and the style of the ads was consistent with Mashtag Brady’s social media content. The ASA ultimately ruled that the presence of alcohol in the ads was a prominent feature. The ASA also considered that the ad trivialised the risks of gambling whilst consuming alcohol, and as a result, the ads were deemed irresponsible.

The ASA ordered that the ads must not appear again in the form complained of. LEBOM were also told to ensure that their future ads did not portray, condone, or encourage gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible, or encourage excessive drinking.

Comment

The ruling clearly emphases the importance of responsible advertising practices in the gambling industry. LEBOM’s representations that their app was more like fantasy football as opposed to conventional gambling provided no protection, and the ASA made it clear that all gambling products, regardless of format, must adhere to the same standards. The strong presence of excessive drinking within the ads made the decision to uphold the complaints a near certainty as a result of the strict approach that is taken by the ASA on its inclusion in ads.

This case also highlights that influencer content, even when unscripted or in line with the standard content of such influencer, does not change how the rules are applied. Gambling operators are responsible for all content within their ads, including influencer-generated material, meaning it is irrelevant whether the content shown is in line with the influencer’s normal social media output.

Gambling operators should take particular care when advertising their products, as breach of the CAP Code also constitutes a breach of the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice.

Co-authored by James Head, Solicitor Apprentice