A Milan court acquits Chiara Ferragni in the charity cake case
The Italian justice system closed a judicial process lasting more than a year by ruling that there was no evidence to convict the influencer and entrepreneur Chiara Ferragni. The fraud charges were linked to the promotion of a Christmas cake and Easter eggs whose campaign suggested a charitable purpose. The verdict relieves significant pressure on her public image and business empire. 🏛️
The accusation: promises of donations that were not fulfilled
The Milan prosecutor's office argued that Ferragni and the food company Balocco promoted these sweet products in 2022 by implying that part of the sales would support the Regina Margherita children's hospital in Turin. However, investigations showed that the company had already made a fixed donation before launching the advertising campaign. Therefore, buying the cake did not increase the amount donated, leading to accusations of misleading advertising and using a charitable cause to sell more.
Key points of the investigation:- The campaign was launched at Christmas 2022, linking sales to a charitable cause.
- Balocco company had set and delivered the donation to the hospital in advance.
- Consumers could perceive that their purchase generated a new contribution, which did not happen.
Italian justice rules that, sometimes, a cake is just a cake, and not evidence of guilt.
Consequences beyond the criminal acquittal
Although the criminal court acquitted her due to lack of compelling evidence, this case already had other legal repercussions. In 2023, the Italian Italian Competition and Market Authority (AGCM) fined Ferragni and Balocco for unfair commercial practices. This episode served to open a necessary debate on the ethical limits in digital marketing and the obligation of influencers to verify the information they spread.
Impacts of the case on the industry:- Prior administrative fine by the competition authority.
- Public debate on transparency in collaborations between brands and influencers.
- Reputational damage to the influencer, who always defended having trusted the data from her business partner.
A precedent for purpose-driven campaigns
The ruling leaves a bittersweet taste regarding how social purpose initiatives are communicated in the era