The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against a paid TikTok advertisement for Midnite after finding that an AI-generated character appeared to be under 25 while gambling and playing a significant role in the promotion.
The ruling creates a clear compliance issue for operators and affiliates using generative AI. The ASA assessed how old the fictional character appeared to viewers rather than whether a real person had been used.
The ASA upheld the complaint because the AI-generated character appeared to be under 25 while gambling and remained central to the advertisenment.
Fictional AI characters are still assessed against gambling advertising standards based on their perceived age and overall presentation.
The generation prompt did not include an age requirement to ensure the character appeared at least 25, exposing a weakness in the creative workflow.
Midnite told the regulator that an affiliate created the ad without its approval, highlighting the need for tighter third-party marketing controls.
Limay Media later introduced age-specific prompts, perceived-age reviews and records covering AI generation and approvals.
A separate White Hat Gaming complaint published on the same day was not upheld, showing that ASA decisions depend on the specific creative, audience and placement involved.
The paid TikTok ad, seen on 3 July 2026, showed a male character using a gambling app while promoting a World Cup betting offer. The ASA ruling confirmed that the individual was created using AI and did not represent a real person.
The ASA considered the character’s youthful facial features, smooth skin, hairstyle, grey hoodie and animated behaviour together and concluded that he appeared to be in his late teens or early twenties.
The ASA said:
Although the video used was AI-generated, we considered the overall impression created by the individual depicted was that he seemed to be under 25.
Under the CAP Code, someone who is or appears to be under 25 cannot be shown gambling or playing a significant role in a gambling advertisement. The regulator also noted that the prompt did not instruct the system to make the character appear 25 or older.
The case is particularly relevant as UK regulators expand AI-powered advertising monitoring across digital channels. The Midnite promotion was identified through the ASA’s Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to search for online ads that may breach the rules.
Midnite told the regulator that it had not sanctioned the advertisement and that affiliate Limay Media had produced it. The operator later ended its relationship with the affiliate.
Limay Media acknowledged that its usual managerial and client approval process had not been followed. It later added safeguards covering age prompts, perceived-age checks and records of AI generation and approvals.
For operators, the case moves the compliance discussion beyond the final advertisement. Prompts, creative reviews, affiliate permissions and approval records can matter when demonstrating that controls were in place before publication.
The ruling also comes during a broader debate over UK gambling advertising restrictions. Recent UKGC research on gambling promotions has separately examined whether risks, rules and promotional information are presented clearly enough to support informed decisions.
A separate ASA ruling published on 16 September concerned White Hat Gaming advertisements displayed around Counter-Strike 2 content on HLTV. That complaint was not upheld.
The ASA examined whether the ads had been directed at under-18s through their placement. It found nothing indicating that under-18s were likely to make up more than 25% of the relevant audience and concluded that the ads had not been directed at children through the selected media or context.
The decision does not establish broad approval for gambling advertising around esports. It reflects the evidence and circumstances considered in that specific case.
For businesses adopting generative AI, the Midnite ruling provides the clearer operational lesson. AI can speed up creative production, but it does not replace existing advertising standards. Prompt design, perceived-age reviews and affiliate approval processes may need to become formal compliance controls.
