Business
Au Vodka ads banned for targeting under-age teenagers
TikTok and Facebook posts for a brand of vodka have been banned for targeting under-age teenagers, the regulator has said.
A TikTok post by social media influencer Lucinda Strafford in June showed her filling a large gold-coloured vending machine which featured the Au Vodka logo with cans of Au Vodka Juicy Peach, before she took a sip from one of the cans and said: “That is so good.”
Accompanying text read “an actual DREAM OMG [hearts emoji] [peach emoji] unlimited Juicy Peach cans [smiling face with tears emoji] & I can keep it?! @Au Vodka ad”.
A paid-for Facebook post in June showed a video of influencer Kai Cenat opening a box containing a bottle of Au Vodka and drinking, before accompanying text read: “Haven’t Tried Au Vodka Yet? Secure The Taste Of The Summer, Au Vodka Juicy Peach [peach emoji] Essences of summer in every sip. [palm tree emoji] Shop Now Pay Later Available [credit card emoji].”
Another Facebook post in April showed a woman saying “you need to try this” before she held a bottle of Au Vodka Juicy Peach to the camera.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received one complaint that the first ad was inappropriately targeted at people under 18 years of age and the second and third ads featured someone who was, or seemed to be, under 25 years of age.
Au Vodka told the ASA that Strafford was a well-known reality personality from the TV series Love Island and over the age of 25.
They provided a screenshot of her audience demographics on TikTok, which they believed demonstrated that all of her followers were aged 18 or over.
They stated the ad was designed for a general adult audience and did not contain any themes or visual elements that were likely to be of particular appeal to under 18s.
Strafford’s management agency provided the same screenshot which showed a breakdown of her followers on TikTok by age group.
Au Vodka said the second ad had location targeting applied to deliver it to audiences in the US.
While it may have been possible that a small number of individuals based in the UK would have seen the post, those situations were rare and fell outside of their intended paid-for targeting strategy.
They acknowledged that Cenat was 23 years old, but stated that this was compliant with advertising laws in the US, where they had intended the ad to be seen.
Au Vodka acknowledged that the individual featured in the third ad was 24 years old at the time the ad appeared and was therefore in breach of advertising regulations.
They stated her inclusion in the ad was an oversight, and that they had taken steps to enforce stricter checks in future.
Under UK advertising rules, ads for alcoholic drinks or ads that featured or referred to alcoholic drinks must not be directed at people under 18 years of age, and no media should be used to advertise alcoholic drinks if more than 25% of the audience is under 18 years of age.
Further, people shown drinking or playing a significant role in ads for alcoholic drinks must not be, or seem to be, under 25 years of age.
The ASA said it therefore expected to see evidence that Au Vodka had taken appropriate steps to limit the likelihood of children or young people seeing their ads.
Noting that the minimum age required to create a TikTok account was 13, the ASA said that the screenshot of Strafford’s followers did not include data for any followers aged between 13 and 17.
The ASA said: “Because the proportion of under-18s who followed Ms Strafford’s account was not included, we could not take the data about her followers into account and therefore could not be certain of the proportion of her followers who were under 18.”
It added: “We considered overall that the (Love Island) TV series was popular with young people, including under 18s, and that a number of individuals who were under the age of 18 with TikTok accounts were therefore likely to interact with content related to Love Island on the platform.
“Even if those individuals did not follow Ms Strafford, we considered it was likely that the algorithm would determine her posts to be of interest to them, meaning they would appear in their ‘For You’ page.”
The ASA ruled: “In the absence of specific targeting tools and relevant demographic data being provided, and in view of the way in which users engaged with TikTok, we concluded that insufficient care had been taken to ensure that ad (a) was not directed at people under the age of 18. It therefore breached the code.”
In relation to the second and third ads, the ASA found that Cenat’s age of 23 and the woman’s age of 24 meant those ads had also broken the rules.
The ASA said: “The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told Au Vodka Ltd to ensure that their future ads were appropriately targeted and were not directed at people under 18 years of age.
“We also told them to ensure their ads did not feature individuals who were, or appeared to be, under 25 years of age.”
Last Updated:
A rejected critical illness claim may not be the final word if the policy clearly covers the condition.
Policyholders can successfully challenge unfair decisions.(Representative Image)
A policyholder recently faced trouble after his/her spouse was diagnosed with a serious brain-related illness. The condition was identified as bacterial meningitis with encephalitis. Believing the illness was covered, the family filed a critical illness claim with their insurer.
However, the insurance company turned down the request. The reason given was that the illness did not fall under the list of covered conditions. This left the family confused and unsure about the next step, especially at a time when medical stress and costs were already high.
Why A Rejected Claim May Still Be Valid
A claim rejection does not always mean the insurer is right. The first step is to read the policy document carefully. Most critical illness plans clearly list the illnesses they cover. In many policies, bacterial meningitis is included, but only if certain medical conditions are met.
In a similar case, a close review of the policy showed that the illness was listed among 32 covered conditions. The medical records also clearly confirmed the diagnosis and seriousness of the disease. When both the policy terms and medical proof match, the rejection can be questioned.
How To Raise The Issue With The Insurer
The next step is to approach the insurer’s grievance team. This means sending a clear written request that explains why the claim should be accepted. It is important to point out the exact policy clauses and attach all medical reports.
In the case mentioned, the policyholder shared hospital records, diagnosis details, and proof of treatment. Despite this, the insurer stuck to its earlier decision and did not provide any new explanation. This is when many people give up, but there is still another option available.
When The Insurance Ombudsman Can Help
If the insurer does not resolve the issue, the policyholder can approach the insurance ombudsman. Filing a complaint here does not cost anything. The ombudsman reviews both the policy terms and the medical evidence.
During the hearing in this case, the policyholder submitted hospital documents and a doctor’s certificate. The records confirmed that the patient had a lasting brain-related problem for over six weeks, which is an important requirement in many critical illness policies. The insurer failed to provide proof to challenge these findings.
What This Case Teaches Policyholders
After reviewing all details, the ombudsman ruled in favour of the policyholder and asked the insurer to pay the claim amount to the nominee. This shows that unfair claim rejections can be overturned if the policy terms are clear and the documents are in order.
It is always wise to read your policy closely, keep complete medical records, and use the grievance and ombudsman process when needed. Many rejected claims can be resolved because the facts and the policy are on the customer’s side.
Click here to add News18 as your preferred news source on Google.
December 27, 2025, 09:33 IST
Read More
Business
India’s Forex Reserves Surge $4.36 Billion To $693 Billion, Gold Holding Rises $2.6 Billion
Last Updated:
India’s Latest Forex Reserves: The value of the gold reserves jumps $2.623 billion to $110.365 billion during the week ended December 19.
India’s Latest Forex Reserves.
India’s foreign exchange (forex) reserves surged $4.368 billion to $693.318 billion during the week ended December 19, according to the latest data from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). The value of the gold reserves jumped $2.623 billion to $110.365 billion during the week.
The overall kitty had increased by $1.689 billion to $688.949 billion in the previous week.
For the week ended December 19, foreign currency assets, a major component of the reserves, increased by $1.641 billion to $559.428 billion, according to the Reserve Bank of India’s latest ‘Weekly Statistical Supplement’ data.
Expressed in dollar terms, the foreign currency assets include the effects of appreciation or depreciation of non-US units, such as the euro, pound, and yen, held in the foreign exchange reserves.
The special drawing rights (SDRs) were up by $8 million to $18.744 billion.
India’s reserve position with the IMF was up by $95 million to $4.782 billion in the week, according to the RBI data.
The price of the safe-haven asset gold has been on a sharp uptrend over recent months, perhaps amid heightened global uncertainties and robust investment demand.
After the last monetary policy review meeting, the RBI had said that the country’s foreign exchange reserves were sufficient to cover more than 11 months of merchandise imports. Overall, India’s external sector remains resilient, and the RBI is confident it can comfortably meet external financing requirements.
In 2023, India added around $58 billion to its foreign exchange reserves, contrasting with a cumulative decline of $71 billion in 2022. In 2024, reserves rose by just over $20 billion. So far in 2025, the forex kitty has increased by about $47-48 billion, according to data.
Foreign exchange reserves, or FX reserves, are assets held by a nation’s central bank or monetary authority, primarily in reserve currencies such as the US dollar, with smaller portions in the Euro, Japanese Yen, and Pound Sterling.
Click here to add News18 as your preferred news source on Google.
December 27, 2025, 08:17 IST
Read More
MUMBAI: The Irdai on Friday, fined Reliance General Insurance Rs 1 crore in Hyderabad for routing unauthorised payouts through marketing and awareness expenses that amounted to disguised commissions. The penalty follows Irdai’s examination of transactions across FY19, FY20 and FY21. According to the regulator, the insurer channeled payments to brokers, agents, corporate agents and unlicensed entities under labels such as consumer awareness, marketing and advertising.
Critical Illness Claim Rejected? Here’s How You Can Fight Back
India’s Forex Reserves Surge $4.36 Billion To $693 Billion, Gold Holding Rises $2.6 Billion
Minnesota wide receiver makes incredible diving catch to win bowl game
-
Fashion1 week agoIndonesia’s thrift surge fuels waste and textile industry woes
-
Tech1 week agoT-Mobile Business Internet and Phone Deals
-
Business1 week agoBP names new boss as current CEO leaves after less than two years
-
Sports1 week agoPKF summons meeting after Pakistani player represents India in kabaddi tournament
-
Entertainment1 week agoIndia streamlines visa rules in boost for Chinese professionals
-
Sports1 week agoUWCL grades for all 18 teams: Leuven get A+; Barça an A-, PSG fail
-
Sports7 days ago
Alabama turned Oklahoma’s College Football Playoff dream into a nightmare
-
Entertainment1 week agoRadiation fears rise after cracks found in $2 billion Chernobyl shield