Not Much Unites The World These Days, But One Thing Most Do Seem To Agree And Act Upon Is That Obesity Is A Global Disease And Those Junk Food Ads Aimed At Kids On Any Media Platform Need To Tone Down

Philip M. Stone - April 17, 2007

Canada’s food and beverage announced Monday that 15 of its biggest companies will devote at least 50% of their ads directed to children under 12 to promote healthy food choices and how to live an active life. The industry will also sponsor new public service ads under the umbrella “Long Live Kids.” They’d live longer if 100% of that advertising budget aimed at the under 12 went to promote healthy food choices and lots of exercise, but it’s just one example of how the world is on the same wave length to encourage the food industry to change its ways. Junk food has replaced tobacco as the young’s Public Enemy #1.

And around the world, other countries are also taking action. Just two examples:

• In Chile, where 27% of kids under six are obese, as is 61% of the entire adult population, children may no longer be used to promote unhealthy food products or oversized portions of food in advertising campaigns.
• In the UK TV advertisements for food containing high levels of  fat, salts, and sugar are no longer allowed in or around TV programming aimed at children from preschool to aged nine, and from January next year the age limit is raised to 15. The industry Committees of Advertising Practices (CAP) also announced new voluntary rules for advertising aimed at children, stating there should be no “hard pressure” or “hard sell” techniques, but they have met with derision for not going far enough.

And what about the US, the world’s largest TV children’s advertising market? Well, the kindest thing that can be said is that the problem is being discussed on the national level. A Joint Task Force on Media and Childhood Obesity – a private-public group examining the impact of media and advertising on children’s health – has tasked the food industry to come up with concrete recommendations by July,

Last November, 11 major food and drink makers agreed to review recommendations that they should devote at least half their advertising directed to children to promote healthier diets and lifestyles, but they have until August to actually decide what precisely they will do. With some of those companies a part of the just announced Canadian plan that could well be indicative of what they might do.

In one positive US move Monday, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation announced it is going to spend $500 million on a program to reverse childhood obesity by 2015, and that program includes an advertising campaign aimed at food companies to offer healthier products.

It was no secret in the US that kids were the target of unhealthy food ads, but the country was startled last month by a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, based on research carried out in 2005, that found that children between 8 – 12 saw an average of 21 food ads a day, teenagers saw 17 a day, and those aged between 2 – 7 saw 12 a day. And none of those food ads were for healthy fruits or vegetables.

And the study showed that it is TV programs aimed at the under 12s that had the highest proportion of food advertising – 50% -- and that 34% of all food ads were for fattening candy and snacks. Only 15% of all ads targeting the young included depictions of a physically active lifestyle.

The food industry cleverly congratulated Kaiser on its findings and then reminded everyone that was the situation in 2005, but this is now 2007 and there are more ads today promoting healthy foods and exercise. Everything, the food industry says, is now different. Is it?

According to the National Health Examination Board, the percentage of American children overweight has more than tripled in the past 40 years. Is it any coincidence that US companies now spend $15 billion a year marketing and advertising to children under the age of 12 – twice the amount spent just 10 years ago?  It is thought within the advertising community that children influence about $500 billion in annual spending on products such as cereal, candy and fast food. The food industry counters it is working wonders in bringing down the fat, sugar, and salt levels.

The US seems to prefer that the industry self-regulate. One of the Joint Task Force sponsors, Senator Sam Brownback, explained, “Intervention by the federal government would actually delay the changes in ad content that so many seek. That’s because legislation would lead to opposition from various interest groups as well as potential court challenges.”

But in the UK, the Office of Communications (Ofcom) that controls TV advertising has imposed some of the strictest rules to be found anywhere, and when the government said it would like to see similar rules for all platforms of food advertising aimed at kids the industry quickly came up with some self-regulations.

Starting this month TV ads for food high in salt, fast and sugar cannot be broadcast in programs aimed at children aged between 4 – 9. Next year the age limit extends to 15. Dedicated children’s channels like the Cartoon Network have been given until January 1, 2009, to fully implement measures, but they must adopt now a graduated phase-in.

Draconian as the food industry believes those measures to be it could have been much worse – many food advertising critics wanted an outright ban on food ads before 9 p.m., but Ofcom feared that would financially cripple the commercial TV industry. As it is, it believes the food restrictions will result in dedicated children’s TV channels losing some £4.6 million ($9 million, €6 .5 million) to £6 million ($12 million, €9 million) annually.

And in an attempt to ward off further government intervention on food ads in other media, the industry has just announced new self-regulations for all food products, not just those high in fat, salt or sugar. The new rules specify that food ads should no longer "condone or encourage poor nutritional habits or an unhealthy lifestyle in children", and that food producers should discourage excessive food and drink consumption and not use high pressure and hard sell techniques.

But the self-regulations fudged one of the most contentious issues -- the use of licensed characters and celebrities to make the sales pitch. Licensed characters and the personalities were banned, but in-house characters continue. In other words, Long Live Tony The Tiger, but forget about Spider-Man or David Beckham to pitch salty food!

Well, not quite yet. Those new voluntary rules don’t come into force until July 1 so Bernard Matthews, a large British frozen food producer,  is  wasting no time with its new ad campaign for its frozen food family favorites that it boasts is “Superfood for Superheroes” . And Spider-Man himself is leading the charge.

Don’t you just love it when an advertiser understands the public’s psyche so well! On the other hand, Bernard Mathews figures it’s the kids that really count, and if they nag enough then Mom or Dad will buy that frozen turkey just to shut them up.

New rules to get rid of that nagging – now we’re talking!

ftm Follow Up & Comments