Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner.

Essay writing ads banned for misleading students

Online adverts for UK Essays have been banned (Getty Images/iStock)
Online adverts for UK Essays have been banned (Getty Images/iStock)

 

ADS for an essay writing company have been banned for misleading customers by failing to make it clear that the papers were not meant to be submitted by students as their own work.

The online adverts for UK Essays also gave a “misleading impression” that the firm had received positive press coverage, the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has ruled.

A website for ukessays.com featured text that stated “guaranteed grade, every time. We’re so confident you’ll love the work we produce, we guarantee the final grade of the work. Unlike others, if your work doesn’t meet our exacting standards, you can claim a full refund… loved by customers & the global press UKEssays have lots of press coverage from all over the world confirming that a 2:1 piece of work produced by us met this standard… We were the first company in the world to offer you guaranteed 2:1 and 1st class work”.

Extra information about the service was included on pages titled “world class guarantees” and “UK Essays in the press”, the ASA ruling said.

A complaint was brought by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), a universities watchdog, which argued that the ad was misleading because it did not make clear the risks linked to submitting bought essays, and that references to the press coverage UK Essays received implied that they had received positive coverage or endorsement from these media outlets.

UK Essays said that neither it or its website indicated at any point that essays bought from it were intended to be handed in by customers to their own education centre, and that if it was providing an essay service intended to be submitted as a student’s work then it would be necessary to warn of the risks of doing so – such as plagiarism and academic misconduct.

The firm went on to say that its service was providing a model answer for students to use as a learning exercise and resource to write their own work, and that if used in this way, there would be no academic misconduct, and risks for the student.

It also said that it had a fair use policy, which it believed was prominently displayed on the website, explaining the proper use of its essay service and which said students could not submit purchased essays as their own.

UK Essays also said that references to press coverage were not claiming endorsement by the outlets and merely stated what had been written, so were not a misrepresentation.

Upholding the complaint, the ASA said: “We considered the ad gave an overall impression that consumers would be able to submit the purchased essays as their own, particularly because of the anti-plagiarism and grade guarantees.

“We considered that consumers would understand from the website that they could purchase an essay of a particular grade that was plagiarism-free, and that they would be able to make a claim under the refund guarantee if they submitted the essay and did not receive the grade ordered, or if the essay was found to be plagiarised.”

It also said: “Because we considered consumers would expect from the ad that they could submit purchased essays as their own that would meet the ordered grade without risks, which was not the case, we concluded that the ad was misleading.”

The QAA’s director of academic standards, Ian Kimber, said: “Essay mills mislead students and put their academic and professional careers at risk.

“This landmark ruling by the ASA is the first successful challenge to their claims of legitimacy, exposing their cynical use of anti-plagiarism disclaimers and exploitative media referencing.

“We will continue to campaign for academic integrity, supporting both students and higher education providers in identifying and tackling cheating and other abuses. This case helps to spread the message that cheating, in any form, is unacceptable.”