A food influencer has caused quite the stir in after he posted a series of positive reviews on various top dining spots, reportedly earning up to £1,500 for each visit without making it clear if he was compensated.
Matthew Davies-Binge, who brands himself as the 'UK's top food reviewer' under the moniker Food Review Club, stands accused of potentially breaching advertising regulations by failing to indicate in his social media posts whether he received complimentary meals or payment for his "misleading" critiques.
Mr Davies-Binge has grown a significant following in Northern Ireland and regularly posts reviews of businesses here.
CornwallLive has discovered that the 38-year-old, known as Matt, has been reported to the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA).
The ASA has confirmed that under its guidelines and the CAP Code – which governs UK non-broadcast adverts, sales promotions, and direct marketing – one must declare a post as an advertisement if there is any exchange of free products or payment.
Managed by Zodiac Global, a talent agency with bases in Dubai and London, Food Review Club is also obligated to acknowledge when a post is promotional, especially when discussing their own products. Matt, who is also behind his own sauce brand that he frequently endorses, has not clarified whether his visits in Cornwall were paid advertorials.
His management team had been contacting local Cornish businesses with offers to promote their establishments for fees ranging from £750 to £1,250, lower than the standard rate of £1,500, according to emails accessed by CornwallLive. Businesses that declined the offer were not visited, reports Cornwall Live.
This practice has sparked outrage, with one business owner calling him "disingenuous" and "phony". Lisa Bennett, 45, owner of Mega Shakes The Alternative Dessert Shop in Truro, discovered he was in the area through TikTok, where he has almost one million followers and was asking for recommendations on places to visit.
Since he didn't mention advertisements, she invited him to visit her dessert shop. However, she was shocked to receive an email from his management stating that a visit would cost £750, supposedly a discounted rate since Matt was in the area.
She turned down the offer, and others have reported being quoted fees of up to £1,250. "It's the pure arrogance of him coming in and acting like he's just a member of the public," she expressed.
"He's making out that he is visiting these places off his own back as a surprise and doesn't make any money but actually that's not the case."
In an initial email Lisa received from Zodiac Global, they pitched "heavily discounted rates" of £750 plus VAT for a 'shoot', with the resulting content to be shared on Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook platforms. After she turned down the proposal, the company circled back after a few days to see if she might reconsider.
The correspondence also clarified that the usual rate stands at £1,500 plus VAT, but since "as Matt is in the area", a reduced rate could be offered. They justified the fee by saying it was necessary "to help cover Matt's travel expenses, editing costs etc".
"It does feel like there is a huge injustice and it is a proper insult," she declared, adding emphatically, "I do think the guy is a complete phony and that's a quote from me that isn't swearing.
"The practice is so misleading and if he is getting paid it should be disclosed. Paid adverts are okay and promotions can be good, but this guy makes it all seem so disingenuous."
Furthermore, she highlighted her stance on advertising, acknowledging that there are no issues with businesses investing in promotions, yet she warned customers about influencer endorsements, which could be financially motivated when it comes to food establishments.
"You should be able to know what you're getting into and this guy just doesn't sit well with me."
Loey Buiskool, the proprietor of Wing Yard at Prow Park in Newquay, has voiced her concerns regarding a food reviewer. Recounting her initial encounter with him during his first trip to Cornwall last year, she revealed that he offered to visit her establishment for approximately £1,200.
Choosing not to proceed, Buiskool has since attempted to highlight on his social media that his visits are paid engagements, only to find herself blocked by the Food Review Club. "I've said nothing bad and a lot of people he's going to see are my friends and other business owners and it's nothing against them," she expressed.
Buiskool admitted she was initially open to the idea of a review but ultimately decided against it due to moral reservations. "It's just hard to see and I keep commenting on things, a little bit bitter, just saying these are paid for ads. I morally just couldn't do it as I knew it wouldn't be real and that didn't sit right with me."
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which is responsible for regulating government standards, warns that misleading customers with concealed advertisements could constitute a violation of consumer protection laws. They advise: "If you've been incentivised in any way to promote a brand, or product in your social media content, for example in photos including carousels, videos, reels or stories, podcasts or other posts online it's important that all this content is clearly identifiable as an ad (or advertising)."
The guidelines state that this includes situations where an individual has been paid to post content, received a gift, or promoted their own business, which may also be in breach of industry advertising regulations.
None of the ten posts by Food Review Club during their time in Cornwall mentioned that the content was sponsored in any way, either in the caption or the content itself. At least one of the visited businesses shared a video beforehand confirming it was a pre-planned visit, but did not disclose whether it was paid for.
A spokesperson for the ASA, a non-statutory organisation without legislative enforcement powers, revealed that they had previously received four complaints about the Food Review Club, all related to ad disclosure. The ASA told CornwallLive: "One of these cases was closed because the complaint was outside of our remit.
"The other three were closed with no additional investigation (meaning we've assessed an ad and decided there isn't a case to investigate it further) as we assessed them against our prioritisation principles and made the decision that they weren't a priority for us to look into at the time."
The ASA's prioritisation principles involve evaluating potential harm or detriment, weighing the risks of taking action versus inaction, considering the likely impact of intervention, and determining the proportionate resources needed to address the issue. The spokesperson elaborated that any content which features or refers to a brand—after an influencer receives payment or another incentive, whether requested or unsolicited, or if there is a personal or commercial connection—constitutes an advert and must be clearly recognisable as such.
Recently addressing the BBC regarding food influencers and advertisement transparency, Ed Senior from the Advertising Standards Agency underscored its significance: "For us, that's why it's exceptionally important that actually when it is advertising that it's absolutely clear that it's disclosed as such," he emphasised.
He went on to detail that paid content creation or compensation through free or discounted meals by brands necessitates classifying the content as advertising. Once recognised as such, the material must adhere to specific criteria to ensure it is "accurate and fair".
The CMA has also voiced concerns, noting: "Hidden ads are illegal and harmful as they can persuade people to buy things they might not usually buy if they'd known that the content was not a non-biased opinion, review or recommendation."
Food Review Club and Zodiac Global have not responded to requests for comment.
For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.
English (United States) ·