Commentary on de Bruijnet al.(2016): Effective alcohol marketing policymaking requires more than evidence on alcohol marketing effects-research on vested interest effects is needed

Abstract

Commentary on de Bruijn et al. (2016): Effective alcohol marketing policymaking requires more than evidence on alcohol marketing effects-research on vested interest effects is needed Evidence on the link between alcohol marketing and problematic drinking is important, but effective alcohol marketing policymaking also requires evidence on the activities of vested interests and associated effects on policymakers and policy attributes.The study by de Bruijn and colleagues [1] is a welcome addition to the field, because it improves the evidence base on the effect of exposure to alcohol advertising and sponsorship on young people's drinking in several ways. Latent variable modelling allowed the researchers to test the cumulative effect of exposure to different forms of alcohol marketing (e.g. advertising, sponsorship) on drinking; the use of cross-lagged models addressed concerns regarding reciprocal effects between exposure to alcohol marketing and alcohol use; and it is the first study to do so in a large cross-national (four-country) sample of adolescents. The results support previous research showing a consistent relationship between exposure to alcohol advertising and sponsorship and more problematic drinking in young people [2][3][4], but whether more evidence of this kind will result in better alcohol marketing policy is less clear.Stricter regulation of alcohol advertising and sponsorship has been identified as one of the three most costeffective means of reducing alcohol-related harm [5,6]. Although the evidence on the link between exposure to alcohol advertising and sponsorship and problematic drinking is clear, this evidence is not resulting in the development of more effective alcohol marketing policy [7,8], with several governments weakening alcohol marketing policy [9][10][11]. Coordinated efforts by an array of vested interests (e.g. advertising, media, sport and alcohol industries) using arguments that either seek to undermine the evidence on alcohol marketing, or re-focus policymakers on other imperatives (e.g. jobs, revenue, votes, sporting success) appear to be undermining the formation and retention of effective alcohol marketing policy [11][12][13][14]. For example, France's Evin Law, originally a model of good alcohol marketing policy, has been compromised over time and may no longer be effective. As noted by Gallopel-Morvan and colleagues [9], in 1994 Evin Law's restrictions on billboard alcohol advertising were weakened; in 2009 restrictions on online alcohol advertising were removed and from 2016, at the behest of alcohol producers and retailers, alcohol products from famous alcohol-producing regions in France and/or of cultural significance are no longer subject to the Evin Law. Similarly, despite Australian research showing more than 70% public support for stricter alcohol advertising regulations [15], and evidence of extensive exposure of children to alcohol advertising at peak TV viewing times [16,17], the Australian government recently weakened alcohol advertising regulations, further ex...

Emerging social media ‘platform’ approaches to alcohol marketing: a comparative analysis of the activity of the top 20 Australian alcohol brands on Facebook (2012-2014)

“…Marketing techniques on media platforms are also less open to public scrutiny. Public health researchers and policy makers need to expand their focus to the role of new players as vested interests in alcohol marketing (O'Brien and Carr 2016). This article takes a step towards conceptualising the marketing infrastructure of social media platforms, their effects and how these might be measured and monitored.…”

Parent characteristics associated with approval of their children drinking alcohol from ages 13 to 16 years: prospective cohort study

“…In Australia, alcohol is more widely available than ever and it is cheaper relative to income than it has been in decades 57 . In addition, alcohol is promoted extensively to children via broadcast advertising, 58 sponsorship of sport 59 and through social media 60 …”

Piloting a classification framework for the types of evidence used in alcohol policymaking

“…Given the comparisons researchers draw between alcohol regulatory policy and tobacco regulatory policy [13,16] this outsized attention to industry efforts may be warranted. However, consequentially, little is known about evidence use in alcohol policy outside of the alcohol industry's tenuous relationship with evidence [7]. We know that a wide array of knowledges and evidence are introduced in policymaking processes in public health [17], and that certain knowledges are privileged by policymakers [18].…”

“…Research on alcohol policymaking has taken up O'Brien's [7] call to map the alcohol industry's influence on policymaking [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14], to the near exclusion of all other policy actors and facets; notwithstanding Fitzgerald's notable exception that documented public health policy actors' frustration with policymakers' decision making [15]. Given the comparisons researchers draw between alcohol regulatory policy and tobacco regulatory policy [13,16] this outsized attention to industry efforts may be warranted.…”