As the debate around minors in advertising heats up, industry heads say that the terrain around minors is murky and the grey zone begins when minors are used less as real consumers and more as shields
Pitch; Aryendra Khan; May 08, 2026
There is a 15-year-old boy who bats exceptionally well. He represents the Rajasthan Royals in the Indian Premier League. His name is Vaibhav Sooryavanshi, and by every standard, he is considered a prodigy. But positioned on his jersey is the logo of Oaksmith Style Studio, a whisky brand extension from Beam Suntory. And that, perhaps, is the uncomfortable question the industry avoids discussing openly.
Oaksmith Style Studio is not legally classified as a whisky brand. Instead, it exists as a fashion and lifestyle venture — a brand extension that is entirely lawful, carefully designed and fully aligned with the framework that permits alcohol companies to advertise in India, as long as they promote something else instead. A soda. Mineral water. Music CDs. A style studio. What is being sold outwardly is a lifestyle, but what is actually being built is brand recall for a liquor label within the minds of a cricket-obsessed nation, including young viewers.
The old trick in new clothes
India’s advertising regulatory structure has struggled for years with surrogate advertising. The Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, the Advertising Standards Council of India code and guidelines issued by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting prohibit direct advertising of tobacco and alcohol. In response, an alternate ecosystem emerged — brands promoting products such as music CDs nobody buys, sodas nobody remembers and now lifestyle studios few people visit — all to ensure the parent alcohol brand remains culturally visible.
Manisha Kapoor, CEO and Secretary General of the Advertising Standards Council of India, carefully defines the issue within the limits of the law. “Surrogate advertising refers to a banned practice in India under various statutes. However, what is permissible and allowed by law is brand extensions of alcohol brands into genuine categories with genuine business models. So long as the creatives of the brand extension do not violate any law, and do not cue the prohibited category, there are no other restrictions as such on their creative representation,” she says. The phrase “genuine business model” carries considerable weight in that explanation.
Kapoor also acknowledges that the issue involving minors exists in a more ambiguous space than the law clearly defines. “While the use of minors in ads of brand extension is not expressly prohibited, it may not be good practice. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has detailed guidelines on the use of child talent in media. Those need to be abided by for all commercial media production,” she adds.
Not expressly prohibited. May not be good practice. In advertising, the gap between legality and ethics has historically been where some of the industry’s most inventive — and cynical — decisions have emerged.