She is a avid user of social media, delighting her millions of fans with glamorous shots.
But Marnie Simpson has had two of her Snapchat posts banned by the Advertising Standards Agency, for failing to clearly indicate that they were ads.
The June 20 posts, showed the Geordie Shore star, 25, holding a Diamond Whites tooth polish product up to her face, with the caption ‘50% off everything from Diamond Whites’ and an glamorous shot of her wearing grey contact lenses titled ‘Mrs Grey coming soon’.
Tooth polish: Marnie Simpson has had two of her Snapchat posts banned by the Advertising Standards Agency, for failing to clearly indicate that they were ads
The shots were reported to the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA), challenging whether they were obviously identifiable as ads.
Diamond Whites said the brunette beauty had been the face of the polish brand for nearly two years and that they believed her social media followers were aware of this fact.
The company said although it did not feel the posts required hashtags they would ‘look to put those in place in the future’.
Unleashed PR, trading as I Spy Eyes, said Marnie did not explicitly refer to lenses or mention I Spy Eyes, and therefore did not believe the snap was misleading to the consumer as the product was not available to purchase.
Banned: One of the posts was a glamorous shot of Marnie wearing grey contact lenses titled ‘Mrs Grey coming soon’
They said Marnie had posted the snap ‘in excitement that she had a new colour lens coming out.’
Advertising guidelines say that a post becomes an ad when the brand has control over the content of the post and rewards the “influencer” with a payment, free gift or other perk.
If the commercial aim is not clear from the overall context of the communication, it should be labelled as an ad so as not to break the rules and mislead the influencer’s audience.
Query: The shots were reported to the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA), challenging whether they were obviously identifiable as ads
The ASA said it was the responsibility of I Spy Eyes and Diamond Whites to ensure that promotional activity conducted on their behalf was in accordance with the rules.
It found that neither photo was obviously identifiable as a advert and both breached the Code, but welcomed their ‘willingness to ensure they would use ‘£ad’ in future.’
Marnie’s representative declined to comment when approached by MailOnline.