The SEC primarily amended the advertising rule for two reasons. First, the rule was old and outdated. For example, advertising and referral practices have evolved; the technology used for communications has advanced; and investor expectations have changed. Second, the SEC’s Division of Examinations (Examinations) has continually identified advertising-related issues when conducting exams of registered investment advisers, such as misleading performance results; cherry-picking; misleading claims of compliance with voluntary performance standards; and deficient compliance policies and procedures. In fact, in September 2017, Examinations – then known as the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations – issued a risk alert that discusses the six most common advertising issues identified in deficiency letters from more than 1,000 adviser examinations, as well as the results of its 2016 “Touting Initiative,” which focused on nearly 70 advisers’ use of awards, rankings, professional designations and testimonials in their marketing materials. This article summarizes the findings contained in the risk alert. See our two-part series “How Can Hedge Fund Managers Market Their Funds Using Case Studies Without Violating the Cherry Picking Rule?”: Part One (Dec. 5, 2013); and Part Two (Dec. 12, 2013).