The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2026
Brooks' influencer 'surprise' TikTok ad hid its ad label behind 'more'
Sofia Pauli's TikTok 'surprising my boyfriend with Brooks shoes' video carried the ad disclosure after clicking 'mer' — RO ruled it failed ad identification.
Brooks Scandinavia AB · 2026-06-26
What happened
Influencer Sofia Pauli posted a TikTok video to her account 'sofiapauli' in which she surprises her boyfriend Olle with new Brooks running shoes while he studies for exams. She holds the shoes to camera and says they are both training for their first marathon.
The caption carried the disclosure 'Innehåller reklam för Brooks' ('Contains advertising for Brooks') — but it appeared only after pressing 'mer' (more). Nothing in the video itself marked it as advertising.
A complainant said the post was not clearly identifiable as an ad. Brooks and Pauli argued it was an organic, unsponsored post — she had full editorial control over a five-month ambassadorship and was not paid for this specific video.
The Reklamombudsmannen found the post was of a commercial nature given the ongoing collaboration, and that a disclosure hidden behind 'mer' does not let the average consumer identify advertising at a fleeting glance. It was held to breach Articles 7 and 18 of the ICC Code on ad identification.
Why it happened
- The disclosure sat behind the 'mer' breakpoint, where the average TikTok user never reaches it
- A five-month paid ambassadorship made the 'organic gift' post commercial, whether or not that single video was billed
- Choosing to keep content 'organic' deliberately traded ad clarity for authenticity — and lost the label
The lesson
An influencer post during a paid collaboration is advertising, and the label must work at a fleeting glance. A disclosure hidden behind a 'more' click is covert marketing.
Aftermath
Reklamombudsmannen found the video did not fulfil the ad-identification requirement and breached Articles 7 and 18 of the ICC Code. The disclosure needed to be visible without expanding the post.
Sources
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Skeppshult's 'only remaining Scandinavian cast-iron foundry' claim ruled misleading
Nordic Nest influencer's 'Adlink lampa på rea' link was not an ad label
Ljus-Butiken's 'from 2,090 kr' lamp deal paired a crossed-out price from a different size
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →
Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.