White Hat Gaming Ltd – ASA

Ad description

Two internet show adverts for playing websites and a webpage seen on www.hltv.org, an internet site for Counter-Strike 2 eSport content material, seen on 27 March 2026. 

 

a. The first advert, for Casimba, featured the textual content “100% MATCH BONUS UP TO £100 ON 1ST DEPOSIT”. The advert featured the Union Flag, an 18+ brand, and a button with the textual content “REGISTER NOW”. 

 

b. The second advert, for The Grand Ivy Casino, featured the textual content “EXCLUSIVE UK WELCOME OFFER REGISTER NOW. 100% MATCH BONUS UP TO £100 ON 1ST DEPOSIT”. 

 

c. The third advert, a webpage for a reside Counter Strike 2 match, featured info on the match, together with photographs of the gamers, the groups competing, and their stats. Below the heading “Betting”, betting odds had been displayed for the 2 groups enjoying, alongside the logos for various playing websites, every with clickable hyperlinks. The Casimba brand linked to www.casimba.com.

Issue

The complainant challenged whether or not the adverts had been appropriately focused.

Response

White Hat Gaming Ltd t/a Casimba and The Grand Ivy Casino mentioned they didn’t imagine the adverts breached the CAP Code. They suspended show of the adverts in the course of the investigation. 

 

White Hat Gaming mentioned HLTV was a specialist platform for skilled Counter-Strike 2 protection. They mentioned the location was aimed toward adults within the strategic and aggressive facet of the sport. 

 

They mentioned viewers information for HLTV’s social media accounts demonstrated that HLTV’s viewers was overwhelmingly grownup. They additionally offered their very own referral information which confirmed customers who registered after coming from HLTV had been all adults, with the bulk over the age of 25. They subsequently believed the adverts had been appropriately focused. 

 

HLTV mentioned they had been a specialist, skilled e-sports media platform aimed toward an grownup viewers. They mentioned the location targeted on skilled Counter-Strike 2 protection, together with statistics, match evaluation, event protection and trade reporting. They mentioned its content material was analytical and data-driven, and didn’t embody options designed to enchantment to youngsters. They believed the technical nature of the location attracted a mature viewers and was unlikely to enchantment to minors in search of informal gameplay. 

 

They mentioned they’d acquired no direct complaints from customers in regards to the adverts or different promoting on the web site.

Assessment

Not upheld

The CAP Code required that advertising communications for playing should not be directed at these under 18 years of age by means of the number of media or context through which they appeared. No medium ought to be used if greater than 25% of its viewers was beneath the age of 18 years. 

 

We thought-about the context through which the adverts had been seen and whether or not the adverts had been positioned in and round content material which was clearly directed at under-18s. The adverts appeared on a reside Counter-Strike 2 match web page on HLTV.org. The complainant was not logged in once they noticed the advert and their age had not been verified. We understood that Counter-Strike 2 was a multiplayer tactical first-person shooter online game through which groups competed in objective-based rounds. We understood that the sport shaped a part of a longtime skilled e-sports scene. The web page featured reside protection of the match, alongside info together with participant images, the groups competing, statistics and betting odds. We acknowledged that the flexibility to observe the match reside on the web page may improve the web page’s enchantment to under-18s, nonetheless, the web page was framed round protection of an expert aggressive match, and included info probably for use by these following the occasion. We subsequently thought-about that the themes and presentation of the web page weren’t aimed toward youngsters or younger folks to the extent that the adverts had been directed at under-18s by showing there. 

 

We additionally thought-about the viewers info equipped by White Hat Gaming and HLTV. We thought-about that the referral information offered by White Hat Gaming Ltd didn’t set up the viewers of the advert, as any profitable referrals would have come solely from customers aged 18 or over. Social media information confirmed that 1.5% of HLTV’s Instagram viewers had been aged 13 to 17, and three.6% of HLTV’s Twitter interactions had been from customers aged 13 to 17. The social media information didn’t relate on to guests to the HLTV web site and we subsequently didn’t take into account that it established the age profile of the viewers for the web site. We understood that the web site analytics utilized by HLTV didn’t embody information for under-18s. While dependable viewers information was not accessible, we thought-about the probably viewers composition, bearing in mind the content material and context through which the adverts appeared. For the explanations set out above, we thought-about the themes and presentation of the webpage weren’t directed at under-18s, and there was nothing to point that under-18s had been prone to make up greater than 25% of the viewers. We famous that the social media information, whereas circuitously consultant of web site guests, was in keeping with that view. 

 

We subsequently concluded that the adverts had not been directed at under-18s by means of the number of media or context through which it appeared. 

 

We investigated the adverts beneath CAP Code (Edition 12) guidelines 16.1, and 16.3.13 (Gambling), however didn’t discover them in breach.

Action

No additional motion essential. 

CAP Code (Edition 12)

16.1    

16.3.13    

More on