Sam Smith is Managing Director of Clearcast, the UK’s broadcast advertising clearance organisation. In this piece, she makes the case that the UK’s growing gap between broadcast and digital advertising standards is not just a regulatory concern: it’s a strategic risk for the public’s trust in advertising and should be a concern for every brand leader investing in advertising today.
Last month, Martin Lewis and Which?’s Anabel Hoult wrote to the Prime Minister highlighting the lack of effective action on scam advertising online. Their intervention is important, but it also exposes a broader issue that our industry hasn’t fully addressed.
We’re now operating with two standards of advertising in the UK.
Where an ad is due to air determines how much scrutiny it receives before the public see it. For broadcast mediums such as TV or radio, pre-clearance against the BCAP Code is mandatory. Ads are reviewed before they reach a viewer; claims must be substantiated and the creative may be challenged for breaking any rules.
Whereas, for non-broadcast spaces, such as digital media, compliance expectations are lower. The CAP Code governs this space, but content doesn’t require pre-clearance checks with regulation kicking in after ads are live. But consumers don’t experience that distinction. They just see advertising.
The pre-clearance process, when applied, can be perceived as adding friction, as it asks more of a brand – to produce accurate evidence and reasoning. This can of course take extra time and may require some back and forth when creative choices are questioned. But, its important to note that this seemingly added hurdle is actually doing a very important job – building trust.
Why the UK advertising compliance gap is a problem for responsible brands
For marketers, the difference between broadcast and non-broadcast creates an uneven playing field.
Responsible advertisers invest time, resources and expertise to ensure their ads meet compliance standards. Meanwhile, anyone can exploit less regulated environments at scale – often reaching the same audiences, with none of the same standards.
Consumers, of course, don’t see this distinction. They aren’t differentiating between “cleared” and “uncleared” advertising. They simply see advertising. So it isn’t surprising that when responsible ads are nestled in next to scams, consumers soon start to feel less confident in deciphering which ads they can and cannot trust.
And over time, the impact builds. Trust isn’t lost in a single moment; it erodes gradually through repeated exposure to misleading, harmful or fraudulent messaging. The consequence isn’t just damage caused by individual scams, but a weakening of our much-loved industry.
The results speak for themselves. As the Advertising Association‘s Credos research showed “people now move through online spaces in a state of permanent, low-level vigilance” – a sentiment which was echoed by the Advertising Association’s Matt Bourn at our recent “Trust As The New ROI” Roundtable. That’s what a widening compliance gap does to an audience over time.
For senior marketing leaders, this should be a strategic concern.
“Brand investment operates on an assumption of baseline credibility. When that assumption is being quietly undermined in the channels where most attention now lives, the return on every pound spent elsewhere is affected.”
Sam Smith
The question however, isn’t only how to stop bad ads, but how to protect the entire ad industry’s long-term value. This requires consistent accountability across platforms and formats, so that consumers can begin to expect the same standard of honesty wherever they see advertising. Of course, regulation will help set the baseline, but, it won’t solve the problem alone, given the pace and scale of digital media.
How Clearcast is approaching ad clearance beyond broadcast media
There’s also a leadership question for the industry. In environments where standards are not mandated, brands still have a choice: to apply the same level of standards voluntarily, or to accept the risks associated with lower-level checks. Increasingly, this choice isn’t just about compliance – it’s about brand safety. At Clearcast, this is how our role in the industry is evolving.
Our focus has always been on providing brand safety for TV and Video-On-Demand advertising, ensuring claims are substantiated and content is risk addressed before ads go live. But, the principle should apply across all channels as trusted advertising hinges on consistent compliance checks.
Working with our technology partner Northell, we’re investing in AI to create a solution that’s scalable and accessible across mediums. Our aim is simple: to make it easier for brands to do the right thing. Because when compliance checks are fast and easy to access, it becomes a no brainer, rather than an additional burden.
Building a trustworthy advertising environment across every channel
The conversation that Martin Lewis and others are initiating at government level is important. But the industry doesn’t need to wait for that conversation to conclude. The standards we want the market to share are ones we can start choosing to apply today.
We need to move towards a system where trustworthy advertising isn’t the exception, but the default, regardless of channel. That’s how we rebuild something the industry can’t function without – public trust in advertising.
By Sam Smith, Managing Director
Interested in this conversation? Register your interest in our next Trust Roundtable, an invite-only event for senior marketing and brand leaders.