{"id":84432,"date":"2026-10-27T10:13:11","date_gmt":"2026-10-26T23:13:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/?p=84432"},"modified":"2026-10-27T10:13:41","modified_gmt":"2026-10-26T23:13:41","slug":"advisers-cautioned-on-updated-advertising-guidance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2026\/10\/27\/advisers-cautioned-on-updated-advertising-guidance\/","title":{"rendered":"Advisers Cautioned on Updated Advertising Guidance"},"content":{"rendered":"

An industry service provider has sent a cautionary message to advisers and advice business owners around updated advertising guidelines released by ASIC.<\/p>\n

In June, the regulator updated Regulatory Guide 234<\/a> – Advertising financial products and services (including credit) – the first revision since its release in February 2012.<\/p>\n

The updated guide contains new information reflecting ASIC\u2019s enforcement and regulatory action on advertising and incorporates former guidance on past performance in promotional material (RG 53), which has been withdrawn.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Growth Studio Agency founder, Allan Whatmore …cautioning advisers to review their online advertising promotional presence in light of ASIC’s updated guidance<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Growth Studio Agency<\/a> founder, Allan Whatmore<\/strong>, has cautioned anyone operating an advice practice that ASIC\u2019s advertising guidance covers far more than paid advertisements: \u201cYour website, social media posts, podcasts and short videos all sit inside it,\u201d said Whatmore, adding that ASIC judges an advice practice\u2019s advertisements from the perspective of the impression it believes a client or prospective client receives at first glance, regardless of any fine print.<\/p>\n

Whatmore points out RG 234 is guidance; not updated law. He says it explains how ASIC reads the existing rules against misleading or deceptive conduct:<\/p>\n

\u201cA lot of advisers will read RG 234 as a list of things they can\u2019t say. I\u2019d read it the other way around. It\u2019s a pretty clear picture of what a good ad looks like,\u201d said Whatmore, whose Growth Studio Agency service assists advice firms run compliant client acquisition systems.<\/p>\n

Who and what it covers<\/strong><\/p>\n

RG 234 sets out how ASIC expects promoters to meet their obligations and not make false or misleading statements or engage in misleading or deceptive conduct.<\/p>\n

The guide identifies financial advisers, distributors and intermediaries, including lead generators, as promoters. It applies to advertising in any medium, from websites to podcasts, Instagram reels and TikTok videos, regardless of the technology used, including AI.<\/p>\n

ASIC states it may take a greater interest in advertisements that do not meet its guidance.<\/p>\n

First impressions<\/strong><\/p>\n

Central to the guide is the overall impression an advertisement creates when first viewed, as consumers cannot be expected to study or revisit it. Qualifications must appear at the same time as the original message, and a link, QR code or reference to a PDS will not correct a misleading headline claim.<\/p>\n

Whatmore points to guidance noting that limited space in a banner or short video is not a reason to omit balancing information. If a format cannot accommodate it, he notes the guide recommends promoters should reconsider using that channel.<\/p>\n

When advisers\u2019 ads get sent back, it\u2019s rarely about one bad word. It\u2019s usually what the ads imply<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u201cWhen advisers\u2019 ads get sent back, it\u2019s rarely about one bad word. It\u2019s usually what the ads imply, such as a headline that hints at a result, or a testimonial that promises a result. A disclaimer at the bottom doesn\u2019t fix that, and the guide says so,\u201d Whatmore cautioned.<\/p>\n

Guidance specific to advice<\/strong><\/p>\n

RG 234 stipulates advertisements for advice services should not:<\/p>\n