The Trade Desk has breached Britain’s new restrictions on online advertising for less healthy food after the Advertising Standards Authority ruled that a business-to-business LinkedIn campaign featuring Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups fell within the CAP Code prohibition.
The promoted post, seen in January, advertised The Trade Desk’s media-buying platform to marketing and agency professionals. It referred to Reese’s as a client and included an image of a two-pack of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups alongside The Trade Desk branding.
The Trade Desk does not manufacture, distribute, or sell food. The company argued that the product imagery illustrated its advertising capabilities and client base as part of a global B2B campaign rather than directly promoting Reese’s to consumers.
The ASA rejected that distinction in this case, concluding that the advertisement promoted both The Trade Desk and an identifiable less healthy food product.
The regulator said the ad therefore breached the rule governing online placement of less healthy food and drink product advertising and told The Trade Desk not to run it again in the same form.
The case follows the introduction of new CAP and BCAP provisions on 5 January 2026. Those rules are supported by legislation defining less healthy products and exemptions around brand advertising, giving marketers a new compliance framework for determining when particular food imagery and product references can appear in paid online media.
The Trade Desk had pointed to guidance indicating that businesses outside the food and drink supply chain would be unlikely to fall within the restrictions even where advertising included food-related references. Its LinkedIn campaign was aimed at a professional audience and was intended to demonstrate the platform’s work with major advertisers.
The ASA’s decision establishes that the nature of the advertiser is not necessarily decisive when a paid advertisement visibly promotes a specific regulated product. Creative teams therefore need to consider the full content of a campaign rather than assuming B2B targeting or the advertiser’s own industry takes the material outside food-advertising rules.
The interpretation has practical consequences for agencies, advertising technology companies, publishers, event organisers, retailers, and professional-services businesses that use client products in case studies or marketing material. A campaign can be aimed at commercial decision-makers while still containing imagery or wording that brings a separately regulated category into scope.
Media placement also has to be reviewed alongside creative execution. Advertising compliance increasingly depends on the combination of product, audience, platform, targeting, format, and the legal classification of the item being shown.
Recent ASA decisions have shown how context and placement can alter the regulatory treatment of creative material. The latest ruling extends that issue into a B2B environment where professional targeting might otherwise appear to create greater distance from consumer advertising restrictions.
Only one complaint was recorded in the case, but published ASA rulings are routinely used by marketers and agencies when assessing future campaigns and interpreting how the advertising codes will be applied.
The Trade Desk must now ensure that future paid online advertisements do not promote identifiable less healthy foods in breach of the rules. Companies using customer brands or products to demonstrate commercial work will likewise need to establish whether those references trigger separate advertising restrictions before a campaign goes live.
You must be logged in to post a comment.