CICPRTASC-001
May 7, 2025
1. Are there clear guidelines that define what an Ad is in the age of new digital media? Is any piece of media that is sponsored by a brand to a creator, for broadcasting, considered as an ad? And if so, is the ASC ready to be able to review the volume of these ad contents, should it become a requirement?
TLDR;
Not everything needs to be screened by the Ad Standards Council. But if they fall under the Five Mandatory Categories and the Five Must-Screen Claims, then they have to be screened. \
—
2. Many content creators create content where they feature brands that they actually like/use (restaurants, hotels, honest reviews, tech, etc.), would these recommendations fall under the jurisdiction of the ASC, and how would they distinguish them from paid content?
TLDR;
If they are not part of the 5 must-screen categories and 5 must-screen claims, then they are not needed to be cleared.
If the post is not commissioned by the brand, then there is no requirement to clear, right now. This highlights the fact that it is a personal review without being initiated by the brand.
FULL ANSWER
Based on the examples, restaurants, hotels, food, for that matter, if these do not fall under any of the five must screen categories, nor would the review have any of the five must screen claims, then no need to screen with the ASC.
But still, the fact is, I was not engaged by the brand. This is my own review of the brand. Should it be screened with ASC? If it is not commissioned by the brand, then the brand does not have any responsibility over that review.
The idea is in the context of self regulation, we always look at it from the perspective of all communication materials should abide by the following: honesty, truthfulness, accuracy, decency, responsibility. Therefore, if all five principles are met, no post, no reviews will come out to be deceptive nor misleading.
—
3. Once and for all, as this is a repeat discussion with clients and agencies, can we address whether a boosted post needs to be cleared with the ASC?
ANSWER
No, not all boosted posts need to be cleared with the ASC. The determiner is not whether it is boosted or not boosted but rather if it falls within the Five Must-Screen Categories and the Five Must-Screen Claims.
—
4. In the context of regulating ads, how can we ensure that some contents are not mistaken as ads, when unpaid reviews may appear promotional, and paid brand collaborations still reflect honest, independent opinions? Especially for content creators like myself that reviews resto and movies
ANSWER
The ads are always at the responsibility of the brand owner. If there is any concern, then the ASC will be contacting the brand owner. If it is coming from a complaint, then they will have to contact the content creator. It is not to put the content creator on the hot seat, nor to give the content creator a bad name, it is only to tell the content curator that there is a complaint and you may want to re-think the post that you did, because of the following reasons.
Will there be a call to action? Will the creator be made to pull it down to give a response and an explanation? The content creator may choose to want to keep or to take it down.
If it is not an ad, or there is no relationship between the brand and the creator/influencer, then it is outside of the jurisdiction of ASC. If there is a relationship established, then ASC will have to dig deeper into the relationship.
FOR CICP CONSIDERATION
Suggestion from the Roundtable to create an IF-THEN infographic for creators on what needs to be cleared by the ASC.
—
5. Regulation should still be flexible enough for creative content & execution. Can this balance be achieved?
ANSWER
It boils down to the fact that what you will be claiming would still have to be truthful and accurate. At the end of the day, I think everyone will agree that it should not be misleading and inaccurate, it should be truthful.
So if what they’re claiming is truthful and can be substantiated, that’s the benchmark command. If it’s truthful, it has to be supported or substantiated. And then in advertising, as long as it does not disparage, and it is truthful, then it is allowed. We’re not here to clip the wings of creativity.
—
6. Applications: Batch applications, Large campaigns (high quantity of KOLs), Efficiency on these types of campaigns.
TLDR;
ASC is working on an alternative to the large campaigns that will be discussed within the Technical Working Committee of the ASC and as well as the Board. Once it is approved, it will be announced within May 2025 on how it can be applied to all digital creator campaigns.
—
7. Storyboarding and the provision of an alternative from being a requirement to applications for digital creator campaigns.
ANSWER
If it’s a live application (live video, regardless of platform) then there is no problem, since for live applications – one will only need a live script. If the 1-to-many application is approved by the Technical Working Committee of the ASC, then the storyboarding will already benefit from it as it will fall under the same category. The new requirement can already be the alternative to the storyboard.
But the status quo is that storyboarding is still required.
—
8. Does Live Campaign include 1 to 4-day campaign activation given that these campaigns cannot fall under the regular timelines of the ASC, considering the S1-S2 application and the production time of the creator in creating the video?
ANSWER
For cases like this, it can fall under the Special Application, allowing a single S1 application with same day decision. These would only be for extreme cases like trendjacking or immediate campaign activation.
—
9. How about the screening of Instagram Stories and 24-hour posting?
ANSWER
This is still being studied by the ASC.