Healthy Skepticism Library item: 17156

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: news

Mace W
Battling the (so-called) bulge baddies
The Independent 2010 Jan 21

Abstract:

With revised Advertising
Standards Authority codes for
advertising of food and advertising
to children due next week,
William Mace asks if the ad
industry’s self-regulation model is
working well enough.

Full text:

New Zealand has its fair share
of obesity experts and with
good reason: as of 2007, one in
three Kiwis are overweight
and one in four are obese.
In recent weeks these experts have put
the spotlight on junk food as a contributor
to obesity, and from there to chronic disease
such as diabetes.
‘‘Food companies’ tactics are ‘as bad as
tobacco firms’,’’ beamed one newspaper
headline over a story highlighting a doctor’s
call for a ban on junk-food advertising
to children and teenagers.
Pressure from the World Health Organisation
is highlighted in another article
titled, Call to ban all adverts of junk food
to children.
Add in a couch-potato culture fuelled by
the recession (AGBNielsen figures from
2009 show more people are watching television,
for longer) and look, there’s another
headline: Watching TV for hours
could shorten your life.
As the consciousness of obesity and diabetes
epidemics grows and knowledge of
certain risk factors strengthen, the pressure
grows on advertisers to take care
about where, when, how and to whom
they target their commercial messages.
Critics are asking for advertising bans
and taxes on fatty foods and the industry
has responded with guidelines, codes,
reviews and accords.
But is the market responding quickly
enough to maintain public health
standards or does enforced regulation
have a role to play?
The Advertising Standards Authority
(ASA) administers the codes for advertising
of food and advertising to children.
The codes are under review – public consultation
started last March – and should
be finalised next week. Essentially the
public can complain about any advertisement
they believe contravenes the codes.
Jeremy Irwin is on the ASA review
panel and is chairman of both the Association
of New Zealand Advertisers (ANZA)
and the Food Industry Group (FIG).
He believes the industry is doing a huge
amount in the healthy-eating area.
‘‘[Things are] still being done, to reformulate,
change portion sizes, to really assist
in making people more aware of the
composition of foods and encourage people
to eat so-called more healthy foods. I
think it’s one of those areas that, no matter
how much we say and do, opposing
parties will find fault and get the media
attention they like.’’
Irwin says existing industry conventions,
such as the television broadcasters’
code of practice, mean children are rarely
exposed to food advertising.
In 2008 a new advertising classification
was established: a stricter CF (children’s
food) classification is now applied to ads
shown during programming times aimed
at school-aged children.
The criteria, a vestige of the Ministry of
Health’s Food and Beverage Classification
system developed to guide school catering,
limits the type of food ads that can run
during these shows.
At the same time, total advertising in
school-aged children’s programming was
reduced to a maximum of 10 minutes an
hour.
‘‘Television advertising [has] decreased
markedly and the guidelines that are
there, in the code of practice, really blow
out of the water a lot of the criticism that
some of the anti-groups make, because it’s
aimed at an older market, particularly
fast-food companies,’’ Irwin says.
However, Janet Hoek, a professor in
Otago University’s marketing department,
says there is no evidence the children’s
food classification has worked and says
industry self-regulation as it stands isn’t
working.
‘‘I do not believe self-regulation is effective
– I have never seen any publicly available
evidence that consumers are aware of
the self-regulatory complaints system, or
that they know how to access and use this.
‘‘Claims that complaint numbers are
rising is not evidence that consumers in
general are aware of the system or find it
easy to use.
‘‘Nor is evidence that fewer than 1000
people make a complaint each year a sign
that consumers in general feel sanguine
about the advertising they see.’’
Professor of nutrition at Auckland’s
AUT University, Elaine Rush, says the
promises of an exciting, active and funfilled
life portrayed by companies such as
Coca-Cola are only ‘‘half of the story’’.
Coca-Cola wants consumers to associate
quality of life with drinking their product,
she says. ‘‘But on the other hand, if
you spend your money on buying Coca-
Cola then you’re not buying the foods that
could be more healthy and actually providethat wellbeing.’’
Hoek echoes Rush’s concern, particularly
when it comes to interactive advertising.
Coca-Cola, McDonald’s and almost
any other brand you can think of has a
social media presence, she says, and most
link their brand to online activities like
gaming.
For example Griffins’ CookieBear.co.nz
website acts like a club house for young
children and integrates the brand into
their life. Although Hoek says she has
seen no research on the effect of social
media promotions, she estimates about 80
per cent of food marketing takes place
there and through other non-mass media.
‘‘Because social media is so accessible and
flexible, I think its potential to influence
young people’s behaviour goes well beyond
traditional mass media advertising.’’
Hoek says the Advertising Standards
Complaints Board lacks the teeth to discourage
code breaches. ‘‘There are no
punishments or sanctions and inevitably
some campaigns will have concluded before
decisions [are issued].’’
Irwin refutes Hoek’s claims saying the
public has a good knowledge of the ASA’s
processes and any advertisement that
goes against the ASA codes faces a ‘‘substantial
penalty’’ in lost production costs
and marketing benefits.
As a remedy, Hoek suggests that the
revised code include a provision that
would halt any campaign about which a
complainant had made a prima facie case.
‘‘Logically, such a provision would create
a more compelling compliance incentive
and would reduce the current propensity
of agencies to push boundaries, which
they inevitably do to achieve cut-through
and success for their clients.’’
Overall though, Hoek says effective
education or social marketing campaigns
would need government leadership because
the measures were destined to affect
big industry players. She cites the lack
of successful industry initiatives so far.
‘‘The food industry has expertise in
stimulating and managing consumer demand,
not in public health.’’
She says there is no evidence that consumers
understand the ‘‘percentage daily
intake’’ labelling the food industry has voluntarily
introduced and that her own research
has found that consumers find it
hard to understand and use when compared
to ‘‘traffic light’’ labelling (coloured
labels showing healthy, not very healthy
and unhealthy foods).
Irwin also rejects the inference that the
codes and the review process is not
informed by public health knowledge.
He says the latest review’s call for public
consultation has attracted 35 submissions
from groups and individuals, including
the Ministry of Health, health boards,
and former health ministers.