Federer and Tchoumi did not do surreptitious advertising, according to SLK
Unlike Iouri Podladtchikov and Jolanda Neff, Roger Federer and influencer Xenia Tchoumi do not engage in unfair surreptitious advertising on their social media accounts, according to the Fair Trading Commission.
As the Foundation for Consumer Protection (SKS) announced on Friday, the Commission for Fair Trading has rejected its two complaints in this regard. The SKS had objected to a film by Roger Federer and a post by Xenia Tchoumi on Instagram because they were not labeled as advertising.
According to the SKS press release, the Commission on Fair Trading does not deny that both cases involve commercial communication. However, it is clearly recognizable for the "average addressee" that this is advertising.
Tchoumi's entire account, on which she prominently presents brand jewelry, is purely commercial in nature. Individual posts would therefore not have to be labeled as advertising. With athletes such as Federer, it is common and easily recognizable that brand logos are presented for purely commercial reasons.
First rulings on influencer advertising
In July, on the other hand, the Commission on Fair Trading approved two complaints from consumer protection in the first ever rulings on influencer advertising in Switzerland. Snowboarder Iouri Podladtchikov and mountain biker Jolanda Neff had engaged in unfair surreptitious advertising on the Instagram platform.
Snowboarder Podladtchikov had his picture taken in the entrance of a clothing store. Cyclist Neff distributed a post from a credit card company.
A person who receives sponsorship services or comparable payments or benefits in kind must disclose their relationship to the person providing the service, the Commission on Fair Trading stated at the time, justifying the inadmissibility of the advertising and the approval of the SKS complaints.
SKS: "Confusing decisions"
For SKS Managing Director Sara Stalder, these are "confusing decisions", as she is quoted in the press release. The rules are not only unclear for influencers and consumers, but also contradictory. The different assessments are incomprehensible.
"There is now chaos as to when advertising on social media must be labeled," commented Stalder. On behalf of the SKS, she called for the Fairness Commission to "establish comprehensible rules" for advertising on social media portals.
The SKS intends to submit further complaints against influencers in order to clarify the unsatisfactory situation. It will decide whether to appeal against the decisions that have already been made after reviewing and comparing the detailed justifications. (SDA)
