An advertorial from a British vape industry body has been banned for promoting unlicensed e-cigarettes in a newspaper.
The ad from the Independent British Vape Trade Association (IBVTA), seen in the East Lothian Courier on October 26, featured the headline: “Let’s clear the smoke of confusion: Vaping saves smokers’ lives.”
The article went on: “A constant stream of negative headlines is eroding the public’s understanding of vaping’s benefits, particularly among smokers”, and: “The IBVTA is now seeking to challenge some of the misinformation we’ve seen over recent months and to educate smokers about the benefits of vaping.”
It claimed that single-use vapes, due to their “user-friendly nature”, played a crucial role in the initial transition away from tobacco, with 53% of regular smokers and 61% of recent ex-smokers using single-use devices.
A further paragraph said vaping, particularly when using flavoured devices, was “pivotal in achieving the Scottish Government’s smoke-free ambitions”.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) investigated whether the ad breached rules by promoting unlicensed, nicotine-containing e-cigarettes and their components in a newspaper.
The IBVTA said the ad presented factual information about vaping and presented findings from a piece of research about consumers’ views on vaping.
They said the ad was published during a time of “public misunderstanding of vaping harms, including that vaping was more harmful than smoking”.
The ASA said the ad was published in a local Scottish newspaper in response to the Scottish Government’s proposal to ban the sale of disposable vapes by 2025.
The regulator noted the ad did not refer to a specific brand of vape or vaping product, and therefore did not directly promote nicotine-containing e-cigarettes.
But it said the ad’s claims around the benefits of single-use vapes had the indirect effect of promoting them.
The ad included a link to the IBVTA website, which included a “Find a vape shop” feature, which the ASA said had the further effect of indirectly promoting unlicensed e-cigarettes.
The ASA concluded: “Because the ad had the indirect effect of promoting e-cigarettes, which were not licensed as medicines in non-permitted media, we concluded that it breached the Code.”
It ruled that the ad must not appear again.