An industry rule-book for marketing communications in the UK is being amended to cover website content for the first time. Statements on websites could face sanctions from an industry body as soon as next summer even if they don't break any laws. The plans involve extending the remit and sanctions of the CAP Code, a set of …
Let's see the toothless get ruthless 
I'm surprised. Having just read this, it turns out that the ASA has absolutely no power at all. Provided an advertisement doesn't break any laws, all they can do is ask nicely that the offending advertiser (provided it's a member of their cosy little club) please remove the advertisement if they'd be so terribly nice. If the advertiser chooses not to, then the ASA rolls out it's big guns and ..... wait for it ....... sends out a press release!!!!!
I'd expect that for a small time advertiser on the internet: maybe placing a few banner ads, created by the website owner's partner, parent(s), classmate or themselves - this doesn't sound like much of a threat. While the ASA might be able to wave the prospect of the UK print, billboard and TV media possibly withdrawing advertising space if they raise an eyebrow, I can't see the major internet advertisers caring (or even knowing) who the ASA is.
 ref. Pink Floyd: Radio KAOS
not all web adverts unregulated
Medicines are already subject to regulation - the MHRA is the body to complain to.
So who is responsible?
Am I just being dumb but who does this apply to and who is responsible?
If a website carries adverts from an advertiser via a 3rd party, then is the website owner responsible, the advertiser or the 3rd party (e.g. Google)?
Obviously the ASA only has any authority in the UK. So does this apply where the website owner is in the UK, the website is hosted in the UK or the advertiser/3rd party is UK based?
Seems to be a whole can-o-worms here which this article doesn't address. I would like to think the ASA has thought of this but...
Allow me to remind you...
...that Pinsent Masons is the law firm behind OUT-LAW.com, since by some catastrophic omission the article failed to mention this important fact the usual half-dozen times.
<title too long>
"...or in breach of another of the CAP Code's provisions can complain to the Advertising Standards Authority..."
who will then rule in favour of the advertiser by default, however idiotic the advert's figures. I've dealt with them; I know.
The asa are toothless because (@Pete 2): "The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is the independent body set up by the advertising industry to police the rules laid down in the advertising codes" (from their website). Self regulation, then. See how well it works.
What am I going to do for humour if there are no biased, stupid, or otherwise ridiculous ads?
- One HUNDRED FAMOUS LADIES exposed NUDE online
- Twitter: La la la, we have not heard of any NUDE JLaw, Upton SELFIES
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Apple to devs: NO slurping users' HEALTH for sale to Dark Powers
- Is that a 64-bit ARM Warrior in your pocket? No, it's MIPS64