Industry self regulation of television food advertising: Responsible or responsive?

Abstract

While some companies have responded to pressures to reduce unhealthy food advertising on television, the impact of the self-regulatory code is limited by the extent of uptake by food companies. The continued advertising of unhealthy foods indicates that this self-regulatory code does not adequately protect children.

Reducing the volume, exposure and negative impacts of advertising for foods high in fat, sugar and salt to children: A systematic review of the evidence from statutory and self-regulatory actions and educational measures

“…Twenty-eight studies collected data or obtained commercial monitoring data on food advertising, and used this information to assess advertising content, usually over time, to determine the success of actions (Adams et al, 2012;AFGC, 2012;ASC, 2010;Batada and Wootan, 2009;Brindal et al, 2011;Effertz and Wilcke, 2012;EU Pledge, 2010, 2011, 2012FTC, 2012;Hebden et al, 2011;Kim et al, 2012;King et al, 2011;Kolish and Hernandez, 2012;Kunkel et al, 2009;Ofcom, 2008Ofcom, , 2010Potvin Kent et al, 2011b;Powell et al, 2010;Quilliam et al, 2011;Rudd Center, 2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2012a, 2012bSpeers et al, 2011;Taras and Gage, 1995). The aim of these studies was to determine whether advertising content had changed as new actions were implemented.…”

“…Seven out of the 18 studies indicated that self-regulation had reduced the volume of, exposure to and expenditure on advertising for foods HFSS for the majority of outcome measures (Batada and Wootan, 2009;FTC, 2012;Hebden et al, 2011;King et al, 2011;Powell et al, 2010;Rudd Center 2010b, Speers et al, 2011. The remaining studies reported that self-regulation did not have the desired impact on the majority of outcome measures (Brindal et al, 2011;Effertz and Wilcke, 2012;Kunkel et al, 2009;Potvin Kent et al, 2011a, 2011b, 2012Quilliam et al, 2011;Rudd Center 2010a, 2011, 2012a, 2012b.…”

“…It was therefore difficult to assess whether results reflected statistically significant changes in outcomes, or were the result of chance. Studies were funded by a range of organisations including national research funders (Adams et al, 2012;Potvin Kent et al, 2011b), health advocacy groups (Batada and Wootan, 2009;Kunkel et al, 2009), charities (Powell et al, 2010;Rudd Center, 2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2012a, 2012bSpeers et al, 2011), government departments and organisations (Brindal et al, 2011;FTC, 2012;King et al, 2011;Kim et al, 2012;Ofcom 2008Ofcom , 2010 and industry (AFGC, 2012;ASC, 2010;Kolish and Hernandez, 2012). A small number of studies did not declare funding (Effertz and Wilcke, 2012;Hebden et al, 2011;Quilliam et al, 2011;Taras and Gage, 1995).…”

“…Studies by academics/governments/advocacy groups representatives -Eighteen studies were carried out by these groups (Batada and Wootan, 2009;Brindal et al, 2011;Effertz and Wilcke, 2012;FTC, 2012;Hebden et al, 2011;King et al, 2011;Kunkel et al, 2009;Potvin Kent et al, 2011a, 2011b, 2012Powell et al, 2010;Quilliam et al, 2011;Rudd Center 2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2012a, 2012bSpeers et al, 2011). Eleven studies were from the US (Batada and Wootan, 2009;Kunkel et al, 2009;Powell et al, 2010;Quilliam et al, 2011;Rudd Center, 2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2012a, 2012bSpeers et al, 2011), three from Australia (Brindal et al 2011;Hebden et al, 2011;, three from Canada (Potvin Kent et al, 2011aKent et al, , 2011bKent et al, , 2012, and one from Germany.…”

An analysis of the content of food industry pledges on marketing to children

“…Although participating companies tended to be among the largest in their markets and/or for their products, there are many more companies that manufacture foods of interest for children who did not participate in the pledges; a recent analysis in Australia found that only fourteen of the forty-one companies that engaged in advertising food to children through TV participated in the national pledge programme (12) . This limitation is particularly notable at the global level.…”