The Press Newsletter (the “Newsletter”) dated 11 September 2025 and numbered 361 from the Advertising Board Meeting, published on the Board’s official website, has been thoroughly reviewed.The key decisions included in the Newsletter have been summarized below for your information and consideration.
An Administrative Fine and an Advertising Suspension Penalty have been Imposed on the Grounds That the Advertisement Concerning the Service Process was Misleading.
Summary of the Decision: The advertiser, Versuni El Aletleri Ticaret A.Ş., used the expression “Philips Home Service Guarantee” on product packaging and brochures, creating the impression that consumers were offered a free at-home service. However, since this service was in fact provided only under certain conditions and for a fee, a discrepancy was found between the main promise of the advertisement and the actual service terms. Consequently, the advertising materials under review were deemed misleading to consumers due to this inconsistency.
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5(a), 7/5(e), 9/1, 9/5, 29/1, 29/2(a), 29/2(d), and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 86,358 and a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser, Versuni El Aletleri Ticaret A.Ş.
The Price Displayed Under the Heading “Products that may Interest you” An Administrative Fine and Advertising Suspension Penalty was Imposed Due to the Difference Between the Price Displayed Under the Heading “Products that may Interest you” and the price displaed when Clicking on the product.
Summary of the Decision: Turkuvaz Müzik Kitap Mağazacılık ve Paz. A.Ş. displayed a product price as TRY 3,906.30 under the heading “You May Be Interested in These Products” on its website, but when the product was clicked, it was presented as TRY 4,054.50, giving the impression of a discount. This practice misled consumers with false price information. It was determined that this conduct violated:
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5, 7/5-ç, 9/1, 9/5, 13/1, 13/2, 13/9, 14/1, 14/2, 14/3, 18/1, 18/2, 18/6, 28/1, 28/2, 28/4, 29/1, 29/2, 29/2(b), and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Article 22 of the Annex titled “Examples of Practices Considered as Unfair Commercial Practices”
– Articles 61 and 62 of Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers. In summary, by providing false discount and price information, the advertiser engaged in a misleading commercial practice.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 863,580 and a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on Turkuvaz Müzik Kitap Mağazacılık ve Paz. A.Ş.
An Administrative Fine and an Advertising Suspension Penalty have been Imposed on the Grounds that, when Classifying the Discounted Prices of Products, Badges Such as “Lowest Price in the Last 7 Days” Or “Lowest Price in the Last 14 Days” Were Used in a Manner Contrary to the Legislation.
Summary of the Decision: The product “ECA Spylos A++ 12000 BTU Inverter Wall-Mounted Air Conditioner” on Trendyol was advertised on 13 June 2025 with the label “Lowest Price in the Last 14 Days” at TRY 28,499; however, the consumer had purchased the same product on 11 June 2025 for TRY 23,399.99.It was determined that the advertised price was not the lowest during the specified period, and that Article 14, paragraph 3, of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices, titled “Discounted Sale Advertisements”, stipulates that in discounted sales, only the expression “Lowest Price in the Last 30 Days” may be used instead of “Last 7 Days” or “Last 14 Days”. This provision allows such labels to be applied only to new products offered for sale within the last 30 days. Consequently, the advertisements under review were considered misleading and deceptive to the average consumer. The advertising materials under review;
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5, 9/1, 9/5, 14/1, 14/2, 14/3, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 863,580 and a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser.
An Advertising Suspension Penalty has been Imposed on the Grounds That the Sale of “Mystery Boxes” Misleads Consumers’ Economic Decisions and Violates Principles of Comppetition.
Summary of the Decision: On Trendyol, the advertiser sold boxes under the name “Bakmakistersen Electronic Surprise Box”, consisting of products with entirely unknown contents, at TRY 829, without providing consumers any information about the contents, thereby engaging in an indeterminate commercial transaction. This practice was assessed as misleading consumers’ economic decisions and contrary to principles of fair competition. The advertisements under review were found to be in violation of:
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5(a), 7/5(b), 9/1, 9/5, 18/1, 18/2, 18/6, 28/1, 28/2, 28/3, 28/4, 29/1, 29/2, 29/2(a), and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Articles 61 and 62 of Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser and operator of the commercial practice, Yusuf Adigüzel.
An Advertising Suspension Penalty has been Imposed on the Grounds That Multiple Discount Rates Created Confusion Among Consumers and That the Start and End Dates of the Campaign were not Specifed.
Summary of the Decision: Depomax Mağazacılık Anonim Şirketi was found to be in violation of the rules on discounted sales for using multiple discount rates such as “50% + 50% + 20%”, which caused confusion among consumers regarding the actual discount amount, and for failing to specify the start and end dates of the campaign. The advertisements under review;
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5, 9/1, 9/5, 14/1, 14/2, 18/1, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser.
An Advertising Suspension Penalty has been Imposed on the Grounds That, Although the Discount Applied Only to Selected Products, the Advertisement Used the Phrase “On All Products”, and the Limitation Indicating That it Applied Only to Selected Items was Dispayed in Small Print, Thereby Rendering the Advertisement Misleading.
Summary of the Decision: Derimod Deri Konfeksiyon Pazarlama Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. used the expression “Up to 50% Discount on All Products”, creating the impression of a general discount, whereas the campaign actually applied only to selected products, which was stated in small print. This created a discrepancy between the main promotional claim and its exceptions. The advertisements under review were therefore considered misleading to consumers;
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 9/1, 9/5, 18/1, 18/6, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser.
An Advertising Suspension Penalty has been Imposed on the Grounds That the Advertiser Misled Consumers by Using Statements Such as “Environmentally Friendhly”.
Summary of the Decision: Chery Otomobil Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi used expressions such as “green production” and “environmentally friendly” on its website, claiming that energy consumption was reduced during the production process and that the company engaged in environmentally responsible manufacturing. However, these environmental claims could not be substantiated with scientific data or valid documentation, and the statements were considered vague and misleading to consumers. The advertisements under review;
– Articles 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5(a), 9/1, 9/2, 9/3, 9/4, 9/5, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser.
An Advertising Suspension Penalty has been Imposed on the Grounds That the Advertisement Contained Claims Regarding Medical Device Products That were Contrary to the Applicable Legislation.
Summary of the Decision: Abdi İbrahim İlaç Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. used the expression “Relieves cough quickly” in advertisements for its medical device products, thereby creating a misleading impression of the product’s effect. It was determined that this statement was in violation of the relevant medical device advertising regulations. The advertisements under review;
– Article 15 of the Regulation on the Sale, Advertising, and Promotion of Medical Devices,
– Articles 5/1(b), 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5(a), 26/1, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser.
It was Imposed an Administrative Fine and an Order to Suspend the Advertisements on the Grounds of Misleading Health Claims Made to Consumers.
Summary of the Decision: Pluvia Pharma Health İlaç San. ve Tic. A.Ş. used health claims that are not included in official guidelines — such as improving joint health, reducing pain and stiffness, and supporting the use of analgesics — while promoting its food supplement product, thereby misleading consumers with deceptive health-related statements. Accordingly, the advertisements under review were found to:
– Articles 5/1, 5/2, 5/10, 5/11, 8/1, and 10/4 of the Regulation on the Use of Health Claims in Food and Food Supplements
– Articles 4/1-d, 4/1-e, 5/1, and 5/8 of the Regulation on the Inspection of Health Claims
– Article 24/3 of Law No. 5996 on Veterinary Services, Plant Health, Food, and Feed,
– Article 7 of the Turkish Food Codex Regulation on Food Labeling and Consumer Information,
– Articles 5/1(b), 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5(a), 26/1, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Were found to be violated, along with Article 61 of the Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 863,580 and a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the advertiser.
The Advertisement of Alcohol and Tobacco Products is Prohibited, and the Content Producer Promoting Alcohol has been Subject to an Administrative Fine and an Advertising Suspension Penalty.
Summary of the Decision: Halkekmag Global Reklam Org. San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. displayed on its social media accounts alcoholic products under the “Efes” brand along with expressions such as “Position of The Day Cheers”, and used logos created with the shape on the “Efes” product packaging and the “+1” mark also present on the packaging. By doing so, the company covertly promoted alcoholic beverages to attract attention and generate demand, thereby exposing users to misleading advertisements. The advertisements under review;
– Article 6 of Law No. 4250 on the Monopoly of Spirits and Spirituous Beverages,
– Articles 20/1, 20/2, 20/7, and 20/9 of the Regulation on the Procedures and Principles Regarding the Sale and Presentation of Tobacco Products and Alcoholic Beverages,
– Articles 5/1(b), 7/1, 7/2, 7/3, 22/1, 22/2, 23/1(a), 23/1(c), 26/1, and 32/1 of the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices,
– Article 61 of Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers, were found to be violated.
Accordingly, pursuant to Articles 63 and 77/12 of Law No. 6502, it was decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 863,580 and a suspension of the aforementioned advertisements on the media company, Halkekmag Global Reklam Org. San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.
You can access the full Newsletter via the link: https://ticaret.gov.tr/data/5d1c9edd13b87615344cd4c8/_361_Reklam_Kurulu_Basin_Bulteni.pdf
Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten
