Health & Well-Being - No escape?

[asset_library_tag 2081,Download the PDF of this article]

The promotion of junk food to young people is on the Government’s hitlist, with the second Childhood Obesity Plan, in 2018, including proposals to introduce new TV and online advertising restrictions and to prevent shops displaying unhealthy food at checkouts.

Mimi Tatlow-Golden, lecturer in developmental psychology and childhood at the Open University, says the role of advertising in increasing children’s awareness of junk food cannot be underestimated.

‘My research has shown that levels of brand awareness among children between the ages of three and five grow really quickly,’ she says. ‘Compared with their knowledge of what we think of as healthy brands, their knowledge of junk food brands is very pronounced even at three. There is also a lot of evidence that at all ages, children and young people will eat more after being exposed to junk food content.’

A Cancer Research UK survey of almost 2,500 children found that those who used the internet or watched commercial TV for more than half an hour a day were more likely to ask for, buy or eat foods high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS).

APPEALING TACTICS

Dan Parker, a former advertising executive who founded Living Loud, a charity campaigning for a healthier society, says junk food advertisers appeal to children and families using various techniques:

• Fun and colourful scenes to grab children’s attention.
• Randomly placed wholesome images such as fresh fruit or veg to reassure concerned parents.
• Offers of extra items or larger sizes, designed to normalise bigger portions.
• Scenes of happy family moments over a spread of unhealthy food.
• While junk food adverts have been banned during all children’s TV programmes since 2008, the ban does not cover any other times that children may watch TV. And Ofcom estimates children spend 64 per cent of their TV viewing time watching shows not aimed specifically at them.

Caroline Cerny, Obesity Health Alliance lead, says, ‘The rules don’t cover shows like The X Factorand Britain’s Got Talent, which are shown in the prime-time evening slot and watched by hundreds of thousands of children.’

A 2017 report by the Obesity Health Alliance found more than half of food and drink adverts shown during early evening family shows were for HFSS products that would be banned from children’s TV. In an effort to combat this, the Government has consulted on a 9pm watershed for junk food advertising on TV and online.

The Advertising Association and Food and Drink Association have criticised the proposal, arguing it will have no significant impact on child obesity. However, Ms Cerny says, ‘A 9pm watershed across all types of junk advertising is the clearest, most effective measure to ensure that advertising revenue cannot simply be displaced to other types of media, protecting children from the harms of junk food advertising wherever they may be.’

With children ever more likely to be accessing content on phones, tablets and computers, campaigners see the application of the watershed to the digital space as particularly important. In the consultation, the Government conceded that evidence on the extent of HFSS advertising online is ‘more limited and less reliable’ than for TV.

Emma Boyland, senior lecturer in psychological sciences at the University of Liverpool, agrees, but adds: ‘There is emerging evidence that digital food marketing may be even more powerful than for TV because it is more embedded into other content, and therefore more difficult to identify when advertising is even happening.’

The Government proposed additional legislation for the digital space, currently self-regulated by the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), as it conceded the CAP code affords ‘wide discretion’ to advertisers in how they prove children are being excluded from targeted advertising.

Current rules allowing children to see HFSS advertising where they make up less than a quarter of the audience could mean substantial numbers seeing such adverts on popular sites, so one possibility suggested in the consultation was to lower the proportion to 10 per cent, with advertisers having to prove they have excluded under-16s.

SUPERSIZING

The Government also recently consulted on restricting price promotions on HFSS products. The consultation proposed banning deals requiring the consumer to buy more in order to get a discount, for example, multi-buy promotions such as ‘buy one, get one free’, as well as free refills of sugary drinks.

Dr Tatlow-Golden says this is vital to combat child obesity. ‘It’s important to bear in mind that junk food advertisers have it easy. They are selling food which humans have evolved to find appealing. But now everything is upsized and the levels of exposure are huge. It’s hard to imagine people wouldn’t respond by putting on weight.’

Government proposals also targeted the location of HFSS items at checkout areas, end of aisle displays and front of store, which it says make parents more vulnerable to ‘pester power’ from children.

Dr Tatlow-Golden says the burden of blame should be removed from parents. ‘Parents and their children are constantly exposed to junk food advertising, and the amount of saying no they have to do in this generation is incomparable,’ she explains.

‘It is not down to lazy parenting, but a sophisticated marketing strategy which has been refined for decades. It doesn’t matter how healthy you are trying to be, you’re having this shoved in your face the whole time. It’s not a fair fight.’

AROUND THE WORLD

The UK’s approach to junk food marketing is often taken to be one of the best. The World Health Organization recognised the statutory ban on TV adverts for HFSS products during children’s programming as a world first and said it ‘broke new ground internationally’. However, says Dr Tatlow-Golden, ‘The Government and the food industry love to tell us that we have the most restrictive advertising laws in the world. That might be true, but there is a big “but”. The rest of the world is not doing very much at all.’

She commends the recent ban on the use of cartoon characters to promote food in Chile, a move recommended in the UK by lobby groups Action for Sugar and Action for Salt in June, but she says there are few other areas in which other countries are leading the way.

FUTURE

While Government considers the results of the consultations, Mr Parker warns large companies are not losing out yet. ‘Business is winning by a country mile,’ he admits, ‘but we’re fighting back and good sense will prevail. However, I fear it will take the same 50 to 100 years it is taking with tobacco.’

However, Dr Boyland is ‘reasonably optimistic’. ‘We have made some great progress already. Local actions such as Transport for London’s junk food advertising ban are really high-profile, important precedents,’ she says. ‘This is not about taking away choice from people. It is about returning choice by taking away the manipulations of the food industry.’