Objective: To analyse the case reports of complaints regarding food marketing to children over six years and compare Australian marketing Codes to best practice recommendations.Methods: Case reports on complaints about food marketing to children under the five industry Codes -the Responsible Children's Marketing Initiative, the Quick Service Restaurant Initiative and the Australian Association of National Advertisers Code of Ethics, Code of Advertising and Marketing to Children and Food and Beverages Code -were qualitatively analysed. Reports on the Ad Standards website in the food/beverage groceries and food/beverage venues categories from 2015-2020 were investigated. The most common clauses from the Codes were identified and quotes from reports used to illustrate the determinations. Codes were compared with World Cancer Research Fund recommendations on policy to protect children.Results: Only 14 of 119 complaints resulted in a reported breach of industry Codes. The most common reason for dismissing complaints involved clauses requiring advertisements to be 'primarily' directed to children. The Codes did not align with best practice recommendations. Conclusions:Complaints by the public show concern for food advertising to children but the Australian industry Codes fall short of addressing those concerns.Implications for public health: Government regulation is required to protect children from unhealthy food marketing.
AimRegulation on food marketing to children is a recommended response to childhood obesity rates. Policy requires country‐relevant criteria to determine which foods are eligible to be advertised. This study aims to compare six nutrition profiling models for use in food marketing regulation in Australia.MethodsAdvertisements on the outside of buses in five suburban Sydney transport hubs were photographed. Food and beverages advertised were analysed using the Health Star Rating; three models developed for food marketing regulation: the Australian Health Council guide and two World Health Organization models; the NOVA system; and the Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion used in Australian advertising industry codes. The proportion and types of products advertised on the buses that would be permitted by each of the six models were then analysed.ResultsA total of 603 advertisements were identified. Of those, over a quarter of the advertisements were for foods and beverages (n = 157, 26%) and 2.3% (n = 14) for alcohol. Among the food and non‐alcoholic beverage advertisements, 84% were for unhealthy foods according to the Health Council guide. The Health Council guide would permit 31% unique foods to be advertised. The NOVA system would permit the least proportion of foods to be advertised (16%), while the Health Star Rating (40%), and Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (38%) would permit the most.ConclusionThe Australian Health Council guide is the recommended model for food marketing regulation because it aligns with dietary guidelines by excluding discretionary foods from advertising. Australian governments can use the Health Council guide to develop policy in the National Obesity Strategy to protect children from marketing of unhealthy food.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.