Next week, The Grocer is chairing the Westminster Diet and Health Forum on the impact of advertising on children. It will be an explosive debate. So...It’s time to take action and curb advertising, says Annie Seeley of the Parents Jury
Change consumer behaviour, don’t restrict choice, argues PepsiCo UK president Martin Glenn
The latest National Diet and Nutrition Survey reveals that some 84% of children are consuming more than the recommended amounts of added sugar. One-third of added sugar in children’s diets comes from drinks and one-fifth is from confectionery. Fifty three percent have dental decay and over 90% are eating more than the recommended intake of saturated fat.
In March, the Food Standards Agency agreed it was time to move on from debating the promotion of food and children’s diets to determining actual solutions to address the imbalance in children’s diets.
The Hastings Review of the promotion of food and children’s diets for the FSA in September 2003 clearly showed that children’s food choices are influenced by the foods advertised to them. The review found that most of these foods are high in salt, sugar, and/or fat and that the advertising doesn’t just encourage brand switching, it also increases category sales and consumption. This review has been peer reviewed by professors and doctors (twice) and has stood up to their scrutiny.
Lots of hot air but very little positive action has been forthcoming from manufacturers and advertisers, which is why the members of the Parents Jury have given a very warm welcome to BBC Worldwide, which has recently launched a nutrition policy that covers all the promotional activity involving its popular children’s characters, such as the Teletubbies and the Tweenies.
BBC Worldwide’s move was in part due to The Food Commission and the Parents Jury publicising a survey of foods promoted by the BBC’s Tweenies characters in 2003. The survey found they were all either high in salt, sugar and/or fat.
Parents were quick to point out they wanted to see their children’s favourite characters promoting healthier foods, not junk foods. The BBC’s nutrition policy states all new licensing contracts for its cartoon characters (Tweenies, Teletubbies and Fimbles) will no longer:
n promote fast food (nationally and internationally)
n promote everyday treats and confectionery.
BBC Worldwide has also stated it will:
n Work with the FSA on the composition of children’s foods, reducing salt, sugar and/or fat where necessary
n Introduce new products to cover a balanced diet eg, fruit, vegetables, bread, cereals, potatoes, meat, fish, milk and dairy foods and alternatives
n Introduce clearer labelling on all products
n Avoid additives and preservatives linked to hyperactivity or asthma.
BBC Worldwide, the marketing arm of the BBC, has recognised the trust parents put in their brand and has responded accordingly. We hope other manufacturers and advertisers will follow the BBC’s lead and make a real contribution towards improving children’s diets. With parents relying so much on processed foods, it is essential suppliers provide them with nutritious food, clearly labelled.
Current nutrition labelling is not clear for many consumers. Independent research carried out by the Co-operative Group found only four in 10 people were aware sodium is a constituent of salt. However, most products containing salt list this only as ‘sodium’.
For a parent to work out the salt content of a children’s food, they would have to multiply the sodium content by 2.55, then by the portion size, and then compare it to their child’s maximum recommended daily intake for salt.
FSA research has shown consumers find high, medium and low descriptors for salt, sugar and fat content the easiest to understand and most preferred method of nutrition labelling.
If we want to improve people’s diets, shouldn’t we provide information in the form they will find most useful?
FSA policy proposals on children’s food are out for consultation. They include adopting such labelling as well as introducing nutritional criteria to reduce fat, sugar and salt in foods aimed at children. The BBC is well ahead of the game… who will follow their lead?
At a recent seminar on obesity, I met a seasoned campaigner who told me that she had been fighting the anti-obesity cause for almost 30 years. My initial reaction was one of concern for the health and wellbeing of someone who has had to endure so many years of debate on a single issue. My second reaction was to realise how alluring she must find suggestions of quick-fix solutions, especially ones that grab headlines.
They are alluring, too, for some governments around Europe who would like to believe it is possible to solve the obesity problem in a few short years by a few quick high-profile actions.
I believe quick-fix suggestions, such as those focused on banning food advertising, are not the answer. Instead, we need to look at the drivers of change in consumer behaviour, which will result in the kind of long-term, sustainable solution that truly addresses the issue.
Obesity is an issue that can only be treated or prevented through changes in individual behaviour, or, in the case of young children, through changes in the behaviour of their parents. Only the individual consumer can take the necessary actions required and this requires personal motivation, willpower and effort.
So how do we motivate consumers to want to change when there is such a plentiful supply of affordable, tasty, enjoyable and convenient foods available? Well, you don’t start by restricting choice. And choice is what advertising sells.
The good news is that consumer behaviour is already starting to change. Consumer demand for healthier options is growing year-on-year, a trend we have seen among some of our own products, where the consumption of diet or light versions of certain snacks and drinks has grown exponentially and in some cases now out-sell regular options.
The motivation on companies like PepsiCo to continue to innovate to meet the demand for good tasting, healthier food is strong and sustainable.
Thus arguably the most important driver for change - the availability of affordable, healthier options - is already under way. And companies are also in the process of looking at reformulation options for existing products to reduce levels of fat, sugar and salt.
At PepsiCo, for example, we have a programme in place to reduce the saturated fat in Walkers Crisps by 50% by the end of 2006 and there is a similar programme aimed at meeting the government’s challenge to cut salt levels.
The two other key drivers for changing consumer behaviour are information and education. At PepsiCo we already exceed the minimum requirements for labelling - calories and nutritional composition is clearly and simply laid out - and we are now looking to see what additional information we can provide which will be genuinely meaningful and useful.
Such information, when combined with (government or other stakeholder-led) school and adult educational programmes provides the best long-term opportunity to tackle the energy-in side of the obesity equation.
On the energy-out side of the equation, PepsiCo has been the strategic sponsor of the extremely successful America on the Move programme in the US and we look forward to being part of similar programmes in the UK.
So, back to the question of advertising. The arguments for and against a food advertising ban to children are well rehearsed on both sides. There is simply no evidence to suggest ad bans on food advertising to children - of any kind - will have any impact on the incidence of obesity.
We support the need for a tight and clear advertising code in the Ofcom review. This, combined with the availability of real solutions widely acknowledged by all parties to be the real drivers of long-term sustainable change, should be sufficient reason in itself to deter those calling for an advertising ban.
Change consumer behaviour, don’t restrict choice, argues PepsiCo UK president Martin Glenn
The latest National Diet and Nutrition Survey reveals that some 84% of children are consuming more than the recommended amounts of added sugar. One-third of added sugar in children’s diets comes from drinks and one-fifth is from confectionery. Fifty three percent have dental decay and over 90% are eating more than the recommended intake of saturated fat.
In March, the Food Standards Agency agreed it was time to move on from debating the promotion of food and children’s diets to determining actual solutions to address the imbalance in children’s diets.
The Hastings Review of the promotion of food and children’s diets for the FSA in September 2003 clearly showed that children’s food choices are influenced by the foods advertised to them. The review found that most of these foods are high in salt, sugar, and/or fat and that the advertising doesn’t just encourage brand switching, it also increases category sales and consumption. This review has been peer reviewed by professors and doctors (twice) and has stood up to their scrutiny.
Lots of hot air but very little positive action has been forthcoming from manufacturers and advertisers, which is why the members of the Parents Jury have given a very warm welcome to BBC Worldwide, which has recently launched a nutrition policy that covers all the promotional activity involving its popular children’s characters, such as the Teletubbies and the Tweenies.
BBC Worldwide’s move was in part due to The Food Commission and the Parents Jury publicising a survey of foods promoted by the BBC’s Tweenies characters in 2003. The survey found they were all either high in salt, sugar and/or fat.
Parents were quick to point out they wanted to see their children’s favourite characters promoting healthier foods, not junk foods. The BBC’s nutrition policy states all new licensing contracts for its cartoon characters (Tweenies, Teletubbies and Fimbles) will no longer:
BBC Worldwide has also stated it will:
BBC Worldwide, the marketing arm of the BBC, has recognised the trust parents put in their brand and has responded accordingly. We hope other manufacturers and advertisers will follow the BBC’s lead and make a real contribution towards improving children’s diets. With parents relying so much on processed foods, it is essential suppliers provide them with nutritious food, clearly labelled.
Current nutrition labelling is not clear for many consumers. Independent research carried out by the Co-operative Group found only four in 10 people were aware sodium is a constituent of salt. However, most products containing salt list this only as ‘sodium’.
For a parent to work out the salt content of a children’s food, they would have to multiply the sodium content by 2.55, then by the portion size, and then compare it to their child’s maximum recommended daily intake for salt.
FSA research has shown consumers find high, medium and low descriptors for salt, sugar and fat content the easiest to understand and most preferred method of nutrition labelling.
If we want to improve people’s diets, shouldn’t we provide information in the form they will find most useful?
FSA policy proposals on children’s food are out for consultation. They include adopting such labelling as well as introducing nutritional criteria to reduce fat, sugar and salt in foods aimed at children. The BBC is well ahead of the game… who will follow their lead?
At a recent seminar on obesity, I met a seasoned campaigner who told me that she had been fighting the anti-obesity cause for almost 30 years. My initial reaction was one of concern for the health and wellbeing of someone who has had to endure so many years of debate on a single issue. My second reaction was to realise how alluring she must find suggestions of quick-fix solutions, especially ones that grab headlines.
They are alluring, too, for some governments around Europe who would like to believe it is possible to solve the obesity problem in a few short years by a few quick high-profile actions.
I believe quick-fix suggestions, such as those focused on banning food advertising, are not the answer. Instead, we need to look at the drivers of change in consumer behaviour, which will result in the kind of long-term, sustainable solution that truly addresses the issue.
Obesity is an issue that can only be treated or prevented through changes in individual behaviour, or, in the case of young children, through changes in the behaviour of their parents. Only the individual consumer can take the necessary actions required and this requires personal motivation, willpower and effort.
So how do we motivate consumers to want to change when there is such a plentiful supply of affordable, tasty, enjoyable and convenient foods available? Well, you don’t start by restricting choice. And choice is what advertising sells.
The good news is that consumer behaviour is already starting to change. Consumer demand for healthier options is growing year-on-year, a trend we have seen among some of our own products, where the consumption of diet or light versions of certain snacks and drinks has grown exponentially and in some cases now out-sell regular options.
The motivation on companies like PepsiCo to continue to innovate to meet the demand for good tasting, healthier food is strong and sustainable.
Thus arguably the most important driver for change - the availability of affordable, healthier options - is already under way. And companies are also in the process of looking at reformulation options for existing products to reduce levels of fat, sugar and salt.
At PepsiCo, for example, we have a programme in place to reduce the saturated fat in Walkers Crisps by 50% by the end of 2006 and there is a similar programme aimed at meeting the government’s challenge to cut salt levels.
The two other key drivers for changing consumer behaviour are information and education. At PepsiCo we already exceed the minimum requirements for labelling - calories and nutritional composition is clearly and simply laid out - and we are now looking to see what additional information we can provide which will be genuinely meaningful and useful.
Such information, when combined with (government or other stakeholder-led) school and adult educational programmes provides the best long-term opportunity to tackle the energy-in side of the obesity equation.
On the energy-out side of the equation, PepsiCo has been the strategic sponsor of the extremely successful America on the Move programme in the US and we look forward to being part of similar programmes in the UK.
So, back to the question of advertising. The arguments for and against a food advertising ban to children are well rehearsed on both sides. There is simply no evidence to suggest ad bans on food advertising to children - of any kind - will have any impact on the incidence of obesity.
We support the need for a tight and clear advertising code in the Ofcom review. This, combined with the availability of real solutions widely acknowledged by all parties to be the real drivers of long-term sustainable change, should be sufficient reason in itself to deter those calling for an advertising ban.
No comments yet