Photobook Shop, an Australian online printing service, has been hit with AU$39,600 (US$27,608) in penalties from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) for instructing influencers not to disclose they received free products in exchange for social media reviews.
The ACCC issued two infringement notices to Tomsem Consolidated (trading as Photobook Shop) after an investigation sparked by a whistleblower influencer.
From August 2024 to September 2025, the company engaged influencers for 107 online reviews of products like photobooks, canvases and puzzles (valued AU$50-400), explicitly directing them not to reveal the complimentary items. One agreement even stated: "Please ensure that your videos do not mention that the product is free, sponsored, or that PhotobookShop contacted you to create them in exchange for products."
"Businesses must not mislead consumers by posting deceptive reviews or neglecting to disclose when an influencer has been compensated for creating social media content, whether that compensation is in the form of free products or monetary payments," said Catriona Lowe, the ACCC 's deputy chair to the Australian media. "Influencers can serve as a significant marketing asset, and Australian consumer law is applicable in the digital realm just as it is in traditional retail."
In a second breach, Photobook Shop edited an influencer's video review to remove negative feedback, changing wording like "it was a fiddle, I am unhappy... it was a bit confusing" to "I used their AI assistant tool to help me make it [the hard-cover photobook] and I am happy with my photo book.”
The ACCC noted that these edits shifted the review's overall tone, making it seem more positive toward Photobook Shop.
Ties to ACCC's influencer crackdown
This marks the ACCC's first financial penalty against a brand for influencer disclosure failures, building on their January 2023 sweep that flagged 81% of 118 posts across Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Facebook and Twitch as potentially misleading.
The posts targeted lifestyle, beauty, parenting and fashion niches where free products or affiliate links masqueraded as genuine endorsements without clear #ad, #sponsored or #gifted tags.
Until now, no companies or influencers have faced financial penalties for undisclosed promotions. Photobook Shop marks the ACCC's first. Previously, the ACCC took Service Seeking and Health Engine to court in 2018 over fake online reviews. HealthEngine copped a $2.9 million fine for misleading conduct, including sharing patient data with insurers and posting dodgy patient reviews/ratings.
Implications for the wider region
Lifestyle content dominates social feeds in SEA's fast-growing influencer economy. The case sets an important precedent that brands can be held liable for commissioned content, even when it is posted by creators. The ACCC’s position broadly aligns with regulatory trends elsewhere, including the US Federal Trade Commission’s disclosure rules, Europe’s Digital Services Act, and similar expectations emerging across parts of Asia-Pacific, including Singapore and Hong Kong.
"This case is an incredibly important 'line in the sand' moment," says Bryce Coombe, managing director of influencer marketing agency Hypetap. "For years, we've seen competitors 'wait and see' how strict the ACCC would be. This fine kills that approach and validates the rigorous compliance standards we've implemented. If consumers can't trust the integrity of the content they see, the media loses its value."
Coombe adds that the biggest impact will hit PR-style gifting campaigns that treat free products as non-advertising. "Some believe if money doesn't change hands, it's not an ad. This ruling proves that it's wrong, gifting requires disclosure and requires the outlier agencies to fall into line."
Photobook Shop now clearly labels sponsored posts on Instagram.
"Compliance is becoming a genuine differentiator for agencies," says Marcus Willis, CEO of Australia-based social-first agency Kill Boring Dead. "The ACCC has made it clear that brands, agencies and platforms can all be held accountable, not just the individual creator."
What it does change is the conversation with clients, Willis adds. "Previously, when we'd push for clear disclosure, some clients would push back because they felt it made the content look less organic. Now we have hard regulatory precedent to point to."
Beyond Australia, regulators in Southeast Asia are rethinking how influencers are governed. It follows an incident last November when Thai YouTuber Jack Papho triggered backlash in both Thailand and Japan after he posted a shirtless video of himself perched on a parked car and dancing in Fujikawaguchiko, a popular Mount Fuji tourist spot. The clip went viral within hours and drew massive criticism and calls from some viewers for visa and passport action.
Critics said the stunt was disrespectful to the location and damaging to Thailand’s reputation abroad.
At the same time, markets like Indonesia have explored softer models centred on standards and shared accountability rather than heavy-handed licensing. Indonesia, for example, has experimented with creator codes of conduct in beauty, health and wellness, offering one possible template for improving transparency in this fast-growing sector without stifling expression.
Source: Campaign Asia
