Design Delight Studio

Nike, Lacoste, and Superdry Ads Banned for Misleading Sustainability Claims by ASA

The UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) banned ads from Nike, Lacoste, and Superdry. ASA found that each ad made vague green claims. These claims overstated how sustainable the products were.

Nike’s Tennis Polo Ads Overstate Sustainability

Nike showed tennis polo shirts as made from “Sustainable Materials.” The ad linked to products with at least 75% recycled fibers. Nike proved that the shirts used recycled polyester. However, ASA ruled that this detail did not support a full claim of sustainability. The ad did not give evidence for every stage of the garment’s life. These stages are making, distributing, wearing, and disposing. The ad was banned because it could mislead buyers.

Key points:

• The phrase “Sustainable Materials” was too broad.
• Evidence was offered only for part of the life (cradle-to-gate CO₂ cuts).
• Missing data on the full lifetime impact led to the ban.

Lacoste’s Kidswear ‘Sustainable Clothing’ Claim Deemed Unqualified

Lacoste showed a Google ad that called the kids’ clothes “Sustainable Clothing for Kids.” The ad noted that 78% of the line used organic cotton, recycled fibers, or responsibly sourced wool. It also mentioned better lifecycle scores than past collections. But ASA found the claim without clear limits. The claim might make buyers think all items were sustainable. However, only some items and impacts had improved. Lacoste took down the ad and promised to add detailed notes later.

Key points:

• Lifecycle studies showed only partial improvements.
• The claim did not specify which products were truly sustainable.
• Lacoste agreed to fix the ad with more detailed information.

Superdry’s “Style and Sustainability” Promise Ruled Overly General

Superdry said that its wardrobe mixed style with sustainability. The ad sent shoppers to a page with both eco-friendly and regular items. ASA decided that the claim made the whole collection seem green. The brand did not show enough evidence for the claim. The mix of products created confusion about what was truly sustainable. The ad was removed for not giving clear, detailed proof.

Key points:

• The promise implied a low environmental footprint without proof.
• Mixing different product types weakened the sustainability message.
• The ad was banned for not using clear, specific, evidence-backed claims.

ASA’s Clear Message on Sustainability Advertising

ASA stresses that ads must use clear words and back up green claims with full proof. They want evidence that covers each stage of a product’s life. Vague or hopeful claims that ignore these steps can mislead buyers. The rule stops brands from using these loose claims again.

Why This Matters for Consumers and Brands

Buyers now look for clear, trustworthy sustainable options. Broad claims without full proof can break trust and raise greenwashing flags. Brands should share full lifecycle evidence. They must show exactly where their products are sustainable. Regulatory checks by ASA protect buyers and help push real progress in sustainable fashion.

Source: Advertising Standards Authority rulings reported by Marketing Week, December 3, 2025.

Design Delight Studio curates high-impact, authoritative insights into sustainable and organic product trends, helping conscious consumers and innovative brands stay ahead in a fast-evolving green economy.