Fast food chains have won a key battle in the UK’s restrictions on junk food advertising after regulators dismissed complaints against major brands including Burger King, Domino’s, KFC, and Uber Eats.
The Advertising Standards Authority ruled the companies’ ads did not breach government rules on promoting high fat, salt, and sugar products. The watchdog said the ads featured items not classified as unhealthy under the UK’s nutrient profiling model, despite public confusion over what qualifies as less healthy food.
Ads cleared despite obesity concerns
The ASA dismissed multiple complaints about ads from Domino’s, Burger King, KFC, and Papa John’s. The regulator found the products shown were distinct from higher-calorie menu items. Domino’s successfully argued its Vegi Supreme pizza—topped with tomatoes, peppers, mushrooms, onions, and sweetcorn—was not an unhealthy product and looked different from meat-heavy pizzas.
The regulator examined the website and agreed. Pizzas with meat toppings or extra sauce were clearly different from the one in the ad. A similar decision applied to Burger King’s Whopper, promoted by Uber Eats in a Netflix campaign. The ASA found the burger’s image did not resemble higher-calorie versions like the Whopper with Bacon and Cheese or the Double Whopper.
KFC’s ads, featuring slogans like “Let chicken consume you” and shots of breaded chicken burgers, were also cleared. The watchdog determined the burgers shown were not unhealthy and could be distinguished from items like the Tower Burger or the Hot Honey Drip Burger, which include cheese and sauce.
One small business found in breach
While the fast food giants avoided penalties, a local takeaway in Woking did not. The ASA upheld a complaint against the business, ruling its ad promoted unhealthy products.
Related: Online Shopping Tips for Norway
ASA chief executive Guy Parker said the rulings clarified how the brand exemption works in practice. Some products assumed to be unhealthy do not meet the threshold, partly because companies have adjusted recipes to comply. “That might sometimes be because food businesses have reformulated them to bring them below the less healthy threshold,” he explained.
The decisions followed last year’s government move to weaken the advertising clampdown after lobbying from the food and advertising industries. Original guidelines from the Committee of Advertising Practice would have imposed stricter limits, but current rules allow brands to promote compliant items even if they sell other unhealthy products.
For families scrolling through social media or watching TV, the difference between a Whopper and a Whopper with Bacon and Cheese may not be clear. The rulings show that as long as the specific product in the ad isn’t classified as unhealthy, the ad can run—even if the brand is known for less healthy options. This leaves room for fast food companies to maintain visibility while technically following the law.
Health campaigners disagree. Fran Bernhardt, commercial determinants coordinator at Sustain, called the rulings a direct result of the government’s decision to yield to industry pressure. The rules still allow companies to advertise deals that include unhealthy foods, and she urged tighter restrictions to protect children.
The nutrient profiling model faces criticism for allowing brands to exploit loopholes. For now, the fast food industry can continue advertising—just not the specific products regulators aim to restrict.
The debate over food marketing remains unresolved.
