Highlights:
An experienced professional walks into her new workplace, apologises to a receptionist, is patronised by colleagues and finds her competence questioned. By the end of the day, she has apologised 14 times.
For Priya, the fictional protagonist of an advert for RiseGuide, a self-improvement app, the problem appears to be her inability to communicate with confidence. But for the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the story raised a more troubling question: was an advert selling professional development also reinforcing harmful racial stereotypes?
The regulator upheld complaints from four people who believed the advert perpetuated negative stereotypes about South Asian women. It concluded that the five-minute advertisement was irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence, finding that it portrayed women of South Asian descent as poor communicators who lacked confidence and were excessively deferential in professional settings.
The ruling highlights the fine line between promoting self-improvement and suggesting that people from particular ethnic backgrounds must change themselves to succeed.
A capable professional treated as an outsider
The advert, seen on YouTube on 6 July 2026, opens with Priya practising an introduction in front of a mirror before her first day at a new job.
She appears nervous as she approaches a receptionist, beginning, “Sorry. Hi. I’m Priya. First day. I’m not sure where…”
The receptionist cuts her off, directing her to the human resources department without looking at her.
The discomfort intensifies in the office kitchen. Two white colleagues discuss the new recruit, with one questioning whether she really deserves her senior analyst position. When asked where Priya is from, the man replies, "Probably some outsource shop in Bangalore.”
Later, during a meeting, Priya explains that she has eight years of experience in analytics, mainly in financial technology. A colleague questions whether she has worked in the US industry. When she clarifies that she has spent the previous six years working in New York, he appears surprised.
Another colleague explains an IT system to her in an exaggeratedly slow manner, saying, "This is what we call the basics. Do you follow? It’s English. Technical.”
Priya understands him, but the scene leaves the impression that her background and accent have made her competence suspect.
When confidence becomes the problem
The advert’s central conflict emerges when Priya speaks to her partner on the telephone.
“I don’t know what I’m doing there. I sound like an intern. I apologised 14 times today,” she says, adding that colleagues assumed she had recently arrived from Bangalore despite having lived in the US for 11 years.
Her partner reassures her that she is the most qualified person in the building. Priya’s response captures the insecurity at the heart of the storyline: “Then why does it not sound like that when I open my mouth?”
A former colleague offers an explanation. The issue, she tells Priya, is not her accent or where she comes from, but how she enters a room and communicates.
She recommends articulation training, encouraging Priya to stop opening conversations with “Sorry”, using tentative expressions such as “I was hoping for”, or ending statements with “does that make sense?”
The advert then jumps forward 28 days. Priya appears more confident while presenting in a meeting, and a senior colleague approves her work.
The message is straightforward: communication habits can be learned, confidence can be developed and professional interactions can improve.
But the ASA found that the wider context made that message problematic.
The stereotypes behind the storyline
The regulator identified two harmful stereotypes running through the advert.
The first was the association of South Asian people with outsourced work and the assumption that they may struggle with English. The reference to Bangalore, combined with the colleague’s patronising explanation of the IT system, was considered to draw on these prejudices.
The second was the portrayal of South Asian women as submissive, accommodating and less confident than their colleagues.
Priya repeatedly apologises when she has done nothing wrong. She appears hesitant when introducing herself and worries about speaking for too long despite having substantial professional experience.
The ASA considered that these scenes, alongside the closing sequence featuring three South Asian women discussing articulation training, presented women of South Asian descent as poor communicators who needed to change how they spoke to succeed at work.
Although Priya’s former colleague explicitly says the problem is not her accent or background, the solution offered by the advert is still for Priya to change her behaviour.
The regulator concluded that the combined effect was to perpetuate negative racial stereotypes about South Asian women being less confident and excessively deferential.
RiseGuide’s defence and its response
Celeb Innovations Ltd, which trades as RiseGuide, said the advert was intended to explore workplace dynamics, communication confidence and professional self-advocacy.
The company argued that the storyline showed two separate problems: discriminatory treatment by Priya’s colleagues and her own communication habits. It said the training was designed to address the latter, not the prejudice directed towards her.
RiseGuide also pointed out that Priya was portrayed as an experienced and capable professional. Her white former colleague had undertaken the same training to address similar apologetic habits, demonstrating that these challenges were not exclusive to South Asian women.
The company said it had not intended to endorse racial stereotypes and apologised for the concerns raised. It told the ASA that the advert had already been withdrawn before it became aware of the complaints, that similar advertising had been discontinued and that it did not intend to run the campaign again.
RiseGuide also said it had reviewed its internal creative and advertising checks, with particular attention to sensitive issues involving race, ethnicity and other protected characteristics.
The wider question for workplace advertising
The ASA welcomed the company’s response but maintained that the advert’s overall effect was harmful. Its ruling was not simply about whether articulation training could help someone become more confident. It was about how a commercial message can acquire a different meaning when its characters, dialogue and storyline draw on established racial stereotypes.
For South Asian professionals, the distinction matters. Accent, communication style and confidence are not measures of intelligence or professional ability. Nor should an individual’s perceived need for development obscure discriminatory behaviour by colleagues.
The advert intended to sell a route to greater professional confidence. In the ASA’s assessment, however, its portrayal of Priya risked reinforcing the very assumptions that can undermine that confidence in the first place.
The case serves as a reminder to advertisers that good intentions do not determine how an audience experiences a campaign. When a story repeatedly associates an ethnic group with particular shortcomings, the cumulative message can matter more than the reassurance written into the script.
