Ajunk‐freechildhood:
Responsiblestandardsformarketing
foodsandbeveragestochildren
AbriefingpaperfromTheStanMarkProjectofthe
InternationalAssociationfortheStudyofObesity
PreparedbyTimLobstein,TriinParnandAngeAikenhead
StanMark
Standards for Marketing to children
Themarketingoffoodsandnon‐alcoholicbeverageswithahighcontentoffat,
sugarorsaltreacheschildrenthroughouttheworld.Effortsmustbemadeto
ensurethatchildreneverywhereareprotectedagainsttheimpactofsuch
marketingandgiventheopportunitytogrowanddevelopinanenablingfood
environment—onethatfostersandencourageshealthydietarychoicesand
promotesthemaintenanceofhealthyweight.
DrAlaAlwan,AssistantDirectorGeneral,
WorldHealthOrganization
StanMark
Standards for marketing to children
TheStanMarkprojectbringstogetherresearchersandpolicy‐makerstodevelopasetofstandards
formarketingfoodsandbeveragesconsistentwiththeresolutionoftheWorldHealthAssembly.
Objectives
ConveneaseriesofmeetingsinEuropeandtheUSAtobringtogetherkeymembersofthescientific
researchcommunityandpolicy‐makingcommunitytoconsiderhowmarketingfoodandbeverages
mayaffectchildren’shealth.
Identifycurrent‘bestpractice’approachestothecontrolofmarketing,includingmeasuresnot
specificallyaddressingfood
andbeveragemarketing,ornotspecificallydirectedtotheprotectionof
children.
Exploretheuseofstandardsandmarketingcodestoinfluencecommercialactivity,including
standardsfromotherindustrialsectors.
Proposeasetofstandardstoformthebasisforacross‐bordercodeofmarketingoffoodsand
beverages.
Developweb‐basedresourcesforpolicydevelopmentconcerningfoodandbeveragemarketingto
childrenandrelatedmaterialstosupportpolicydevelopment.
Projectpartners
InternationalAssociationfortheStudyofObesity,London,UK
RuddCentreforFoodPolicyandObesity,YaleUniversity,NewHaven,Connectic ut,USA
PublicHealthNutrition,MetropolitanUniversityCollege,Copenhagen,Denmark
©IASOJune2011
www.iaso.org
ThisreporthasbeenproducedwiththeassistanceoftheEuropeanUnionwithinthe
frameworkofthePilotProjectonTransatlanticMethodsforHandlingGlobalChallenges.
ThecontentsofthisreportarethesoleresponsibilityofIASOandcaninnowaybetaken
toreflecttheviewsoftheEuropean
Union.
Contents
Summary1
1.Background3
Policydevelopment3
Nextsteps4
2.Company‐ledself‐regulation6
Problemsofdefinitions6
Whatageisachild?6
Whichproductscanbepromoted?7
Whichmedia?8
Furthergapsincompany‐ledself‐regulation9
Company‐ownedwebsites9
Socialnetworkingsites10
Generalisedbranding11
Schoolsandotherchildren’ssettings12
Characterlicensingandbrandequitycharacters 13
Productdesignandpackaging15
Shopdisplays15
Child‐to‐childmarketing15
Newtechnology16
3.Proposedstandards18
Standard1:Specifyingthe
foodsandbeverages 18
Standard2:Agegroups18
Standard3:Mediausedformarketingmessages 19
Standard4:Marketingmethods19
Standard5:Useofbrands20
Standard6:Settingsandlocations20
Standard7:Accountability21
Appendix
WorldHealthOrganizationSetofRecommendationsonthe
MarketingofFoodsandNon‐alcoholicBeveragestoChildren 22
1
Summary
Duringthelastdecadeconsumergroups,parentsandteachers’bodies,andpublichealth
advocacyorganisationshavecalledforgreatercontrolonthemarketingoffoodsand
beveragestochildren.Anumberofauthoritativereportshavehighlightedtheneedto
restrictsuchmarketingtoensurethatchildrenarenotundulyinfluencedtoconsumefoods
highinfats,sugarandsalt.A2009reviewofregulations(thePolMarkstudy
1
)suggestedthat
successfulregulationrequiredgovernmentleadershipwithspecifiedtimelinesandclear,
measurableobjectives.In2010theWorldHealthAssemblypassedaResolutionwhichurged
memberstatestointroducecontrolsonthemarketingoffoodsandbeveragestochildren,
andissuedasetofRecommendationsidentifyingtheapproachesthatcouldbetaken
2
.
Theseincreasingcallsforactionhaveledtoaseriesofpolicyresponses,including
government‐ledvoluntaryagreementswithindustryandstatutoryregulation.Ofparticular
importanceistheresponseofleadingfoodandbeveragecompanies,whohaveproposed
theproposedaseriesofcompany‐ledpledgestoreducetheirmarketingactivitiesdirected
atchildren.Thesepledgescovertypesofmarketingpracticewhichmaylieoutsidethe
traditionalindustry‐widecodesofconductandnationalregulationsonadvertising.
However,comparisonofdifferentcompanypledgesandstatementsshowsadegreeof
inconsistency,asshowninthisreport,whichmakesevaluationoftheimpactofthepledges
hardtoassess.Furthermorethereappeartobelapsesintheadherencetothesepledges
withinEurope,andevidencethattheyarenotappliedinotherregions(givingriseto‘off‐
shore’marketingtoEuropeanchildrenviatheinternet)socallingintoquestionthe
companies’strengthofcommitment.
Inordertoassistgovernmentsandguideindustry,theStanMarkprojectundertookaseries
ofpolicyandresearchmeetingsinvolvingexpertsandofficialsfromcountriesinEuropeand
NorthAmerica,fundedunderthePilotProjectsprogrammeoftheEuropeanUnion’s
ExternalAffairsService
3
.
Fromthesemeetingsaseriesofproposalsweregeneratedandarepresentedhereforuse
byWHOmemberstategovernments.Forcross‐bordermarketingitisintendedthatthe
foodandadvertisingindustrieswillrecognisetheadvantagesofacommon,universalsetof
standardsapplicabletoallcompaniesandwhich
canprotectchildrenacrosstheglobe.
ThestandardsproposedarebasedontheWHOrecommendations,whichidentifyboth
‘exposure’and‘power’asindependentfactorsdeterminingtheeffectivenessofmarketing
messages.TheStanMarkprojectproposesthefollowing:
• Arisk‐basedapproach,allowingthepromotionoffruit,vegetablesetctochildren,
but
prohibitingthemarketingoffoodsandbeverageshighinsaturatedfat,transfat,sugars
andsalt.
1
See />2
See />3
See />2
• Riskreduction:byreducingtheexposureandpoweroffoodmarketingmessagesseen
bychildren.
• Childrenarepersonswhohavenotyetreachedanagewhentheyarelegallyconsidered
tobecompetenttoprotecttheirownwelfare.
• Foodstobepromotedarethoseproductswhichconformtonationalandinternational
dietaryguidelinessupportingWHO’sGlobalStrategytopreventobesityandchronic
disease.
• Marketingmediaarethosewhichcarrymarketingmessages,including:packaging,
productformulationandpresentation,andsportsevents.
• Marketingtechniquesincludealltechniqueswithspecialappealtochildrenand
adolescents.
• Non‐specificbrandpromotionshouldbeassumedtobeprohibitedunlessthepromotion
isspecificallyandonlyforpermittedproducts.
• Marketinglocationsincluderetailandcateringplacesandsettingswherechildrenmay
beundulyexposed–i.e.wherechildrengather.
• Accountablebodiesarethosewitha‘dutyofcare’inthemarketingprocess,including
mediadistributors,webhostsandinternetserviceproviders.
3
1Background
Forachild,excessbodyweightisariskfactorforlateradultdisease,includingdiabetes,
heartdisease,severalmajorcancersandotherchronicdiseases.Childhoodoverweightis
associatedwithimpairedhealthduringchildhooditself,includingpsycho‐socialdistress,
increasedriskofhighbloodpressure,insulinresistanceandfattyliverdiseasewhichmay
continueuntreatedformanyyears.Onceestablished,obesityinchildren(asinadults)is
hardtoreverse.Primarypreventionisessential.
Marketingofpotentiallyunhealthyfoodproductsisrecognisedasapossiblefactorinchild
obesityandwasidentifiedasariskinanexpertreportfortheWorldHealthOrganizationin
2002
4
.SystematicreviewsconductedintheUKin2003,
5
intheUSAin2005
6
andforthe
EuropeanParliament,
7
allconcludedthat,despitesubstantialgapsintheevidence,
advertisinghadasufficienteffectonchildobesitytomeritaction.
Policydevelopment
TheissueoffoodmarketingtochildrenisnowhighonthepolicyagendainEurope.This
followsthecallforthefoodindustrytoregulateitself,issuedin2005bythenHealth
CommissionerMarkosKyprianou,andthepan‐EuropeanMinisterialCharteronObesity
agreedinIstanbul,September2006,
8
whichcalledfor“theregulationstosubstantially
reducetheextentandimpactofcommercialpromotionofenergy‐densefoodsand
beverages,particularlytochildren,withthedevelopmentofinternationalapproaches,such
asacodeonmarketingtochildreninthisarea”.
TheEuropeanCommission’s2007WhitePaperonobesitynotedtheneedforactioninthis
areaand,whilesupportingvoluntaryinitiatives,promisedareviewin2010todetermine
whetherotherapproachesarerequired.
9
TheCommission’shealthandconsumer
directorate,DGSanco,hashostedaseriesofmeetingsbetweencivilsocietyandindustry
representativesintheEuropeanPlatformonDiet,PhysicalActivityandHealthdiscussing
industryself‐regulation.In2007theWorldHealthAssemblycalledforrecommendationson
marketingtochildren,includingcross‐border
issues
10
whichwerepresentedtotheWorld
HealthAssemblyin2010.In2009,theWHOEuropeanRegionalNetworkontheProtection
ofChildrenfromMarketingPressureproposedasetofstandardsforadvertisingfoodto
children.
11
4
WHO(2002)Diet,NutritionandthePreventionofChronicDiseases.TechnicalReportSeries916.See
/>5
DoesFoodPromotionInfluenceChildren?ASystematicReviewoftheEvidenceFoodStandardsAgency,London2003.See
/>6
FoodMarketingtoChildrenandYouth:ThreatorOpportunity?Institute ofMedicine,WashingtonDC2005.
7
AdvertisingandmarketingpracticesonchildobesityDGInternalPolicies,EuropeanParliament,Brussels,2008.
IP/A/ENVI/NT/2007‐20&21.(PE400.989)
8
EuropeanCharteroncounteractingobesity,paragraph2.4.6,EUR/06/5062700/8,61995.WorldHealthOrganisation,
RegionalOfficeforEurope,2006.See />9
AStrategyforEuropeonNutrition,OverweightandObesityrelatedhealthissues.COM(2007)279Page6.Brussels.
10
ResolutionWHA60.23.WorldHealthAssemblyGeneva,2007.See
/>11
CodeonMarketingofFoodandNon‐AlcoholicBeveragestoChildren,EuropeanNetworkonreducing
marketingpressureonchildren,2009.See />4
AEuropeanParliamentaryreportintotheissuerecommendedthat,whiletheevidence
remainedcontestable,actionshouldbetakentoprotectchildrenonaprecautionarybasis,
12
andtheEuropeanParliamentin2008resolvedthatstrongermeasuresshouldbeconsidered
ifa2010‐11reviewoftheself‐regulatoryapproachshowedinadequateprogress
13
.
IntheUSAthereisrisinginterestovertheroleofindustryinpromotingpoordietsto
children,withareviewoftheissuebytheInstituteofMedicinein2004‐5
14
.Thisfollowed
actionatlocalleveltoreducethepromotionofpoordietsinschools,andareportbytheUS
GeneralAccountingOfficeonthelargenumberofmethodsusedbyfoodandbeverage
marketerstoaccesschildrenatschool.
15
Furthermovestorestrictmarketingfollowedameetingofresearchersandpolicyadvisors
heldinlateJuly2009intheWhiteHousebyMichelleObama,focussingonchildobesityand
opportunitiesforinterventions.TheUSFederalTradeCommissionpublishedawidely‐cited
reportonmarketingfoodtochildrenin2008
16
,andhasheldaseriesofconsultationson
proposedcriteriaforrestringmarketing,developedbythefederalgovernment’s
InteragencyWorkingGroup(theFTC,theUSDA,theCDCandtheFDA).
17
InMay2010the
GroceryManufacturersofAmericapledgedtocut1.5trillioncaloriesfromtheUSdietby
2015.
18
OfspecificconcernintheUSA,asitisinEurope,isthequestionofself‐regulationby
theindustryversusstatutoryregulation,withindustrypromisesbeingwatchedbytheWhite
Houseandmonitoredbyindependentagencies
19
.
Nextsteps
Recentresearchhasstrengthenedtheevidencebaseforaction,butcrucialworkonthe
impactonparticularpopulationsubgroups,suchaschildreninlowerincomefamilies,
childreninspecificculturalandethnicgroups,ornewimmigrantfamilies,needstobe
extended.Atthesametimethetechnologyforadvertisinghaschanged,withnewformsof
media(i.e.internet,cellphones)becomingavailabletolargernumbersofchildrenand
offeringlow‐cost,effectivemeansofreachingchildrendirectlyformarketingpurposes.
Furthermore,cross‐bordermarketing–e.g.usinginternet,satellite,andproductplacement
inimportedprogrammes–isnotamenabletocontrolbyasinglejurisdiction.
12
TheEffectofAdvertisingandMarketingPracticesonChildObesity.EconomicandScientificPolicy,DGInternalPolicies,
EuropeanParliament,Brussels,2008.IP/A/ENVI/ST/2007‐16.(PE393.525)
13
Item40,EuropeanParliamentresolutionof25September2008ontheWhitePaperonnutrition,overweight
andobesity‐relatedhealthissues.P6_TA(2008)0461.
14
FoodMarketingtoChildrenandYouth:ThreatorOpportunity?InstituteofMedicine,WashingtonDC2005.
15
CommercialActivitiesinSchools.USGeneralAccountingOfficeGAO/HEHS‐00‐156,2001(alsoGAO‐04‐810,
2004).
16
MarketingFoodToChildrenandAdolescents:AReviewofIndustryExpenditures,Activities,andSelf‐
Regulation:AFederalTradeCommissionReportToCongress.FederalTradeCommission,WashingtonDC,July
2008.See />17
FederalTradesCommission(2011)InteragencyWorkingGroupSeeksInputonProposedVoluntaryPrinciples
forMarketingFoodtoChildren.See />18
See />15‐trillion‐calories‐by‐2015/
19
BlackJ,(18/05/2010)MichelleObamaapplaudsfoodindustrygroup'spledgetotrimcalories.Washington
Post.See />5
bordermarketing,usinginternet,satellite,andproductplacementinimportedprogrammes,
isnotamenabletocontrolbyasinglejurisdiction.
Inresponsetopublicconcern,civilsocietyorganisationshaveproposedstandardswhich
wouldapplytocommercialoperatorsinallcountriesandtherebyprotectchildrenwhether
ornotthelocalregulatoryenvironmentwasabletodoso.Suchstandardswouldhave
considerablemoralauthorityandwouldactasa‘soft’regulatoryprocessakintotheforms
ofgovernanceknowninEuropeastheOpenMethodofCoordination,i.e.theyrelyon
identificationofgoodandbadpracticesandpublicitytoencouragehighstandards.
InMay2010the63
rd
WorldHealthAssemblyof193governmentsendorsedasetof
recommendationsonmarketingoffoodsandnon‐alcoholicbeveragestochildrenandcalled
forinternationalactiontoreducetheimpactonchildrenofthemarketingoffoodsor
beverageshighinsaturatedortransfats,freesugarsorsalt(HSTFSS).
20
The
recommendationsformedpartoftheWorldHealthOrganization’sglobalstrategyforthe
preventionandcontrolofnon‐communicablediseases.TheAssemblyurgedmember
nationstotakeactiontoreduceboththeexposureofchildrento,andthepowerof,
marketingforsuchfoods.
However,nationalgovernmentsmaynotbeabletocontrolallthemarketingpracticesthat
influenceachild’sdiet.MarketingopportunitiesarisewhenTVchannelsarereceivedfrom
sourcesoutsidenationalboundaries,whenInternetaccessislargelyunmediated,when
sponsoredsportingeventsaretransmittedglobally,andwhenfilmsandvideogamesare
tradedacrossnationalborders.Itfollowsthatasetofuniversalstandardscanhelpto
ensurethatthemarketingofHSTFSSproductscanfullycomplywiththeWorldHealth
Assembly’srecommendations.
Universalmarketingstandardshavefurtherbenefits.Restrictedmarketingcanserveto
equalisethecompetitiveenvironmentforcompaniesofdifferentsizes.Froman
enforcementviewpoint,aset
ofuniversalstandardscansupportnationalauthorities,the
privatesectorandcivilsocietytoensurecomplianceandtorespondtoinfringements.
Further,wherenationalauthoritiesdonothavethecapacitytoensurechildrenand
adolescentsareprotectedfromlocalorcross‐bordermarketingoffoodsandbeverages,a
setofinternationally‐agreedstandardscanensureacommon,minimumlevelofprotection
foryoungpeopleinallnations.
20
WHO,2010.63
rd
WorldHealthAssembly. />en.pdf.Seealso />6
2.Company‐ledself‐regulation
Inthissectionwefocusoncompany‐ledvoluntaryinitiativeswhichseektoextendbeyond
theindustry‐widemarketingcodesandadvertisingco‐regulatorymechanisms.Weconsider
someofthemoreprominentproblemsthathavebeenencounteredwithindustry‐ledself‐
regulatoryapproaches.Theexamplesaredrawnprimarilyfromcompanyactivitiesin
Europe,althoughitshouldbenotedthatthesamecompanies’websitesinotherregionsare
easilyaccessedbyEuropeanchildren.Inthiswaycompaniescan‘off‐shore’someoftheir
marketingactivitiesdirectedtochildreninEurope.
Severalconcernsaroundself‐regulationarise.Self‐imposedrulesmaybe:
• poorlyorinconsistentlydefined
• erraticallyorinsufficientlymonitored
• weaklyorinconsistentlyenforced
Thisreportwillnotexploretheissuesofmonitoringandenforcement,althoughtheseare
seriousconcernsthatneedtobeaddressedbypolicy‐makers.Atpresent,monitoringand
complaint‐handlingbodiesdonotenforcecompany‐ledinitiatives.Alackofanindependent
complaintmechanismcanleaveconsumersfrustrated,andalackofenforcementallows
company‐ledinitiativestoberolledbackatanytime.Ifamonitoringandcomplaint‐
handlingbodywereestablisheditwouldneedtogainconsumerconfidence,forwhichit
wouldneed(a)tobetransparentinoperationwithroutineregularpublicationsoftheir
activities;(b)tobeindependentandfreefromindustryinfluence,andseentobeso;and(c)
toensurethattheirservicesareeasilyandinexpensivelyaccessedbyconsumers.Penalties
mustbecommensuratewiththesizeofthemarketingbudgetsinvolvedandwiththe
estimatedexposureofchildrentotheoffendingcommercialmessages.
Afurtherconcernistheneedtoensurethat,whateverthedifferencesindefinitionsor
approaches,allcompaniesshouldmakesomecommitmenttoofferself‐restraint.Inthe
Europeanregiononly11companieshavejoinedthescheme,alongwiththeEuropean
SnacksAssociation.Severalmajorcompanies,includingMcDonald’s,KFCandHaribo,and
manysmalleronesarenotincluded.
Problemsofdefinitions
Companieschoosetherulestoimposeuponthemselves.Asaresulttherearelikelytobe
discrepanciesandinconsistencies.Hereweshalllookatsuchproblemsencounteredwithin
thepledgesandpromisesandactivitiesundertakenbycompaniesintheEuropeanUnion.
Whatageisachild?
Thetablebelowprovidesexamplesofdefinitionsoftheage‐rangefor‘child’bycompanies
participatingintheEUpledgescheme.Pleasenotethattheinterpretationofacompany
policycanbecomplex,andreadersareadvisedtocheckthecompanystatementsfor
themselves(hyperlinksareprovided).
7
Table1AgedefinitionsincompanyEUpledges(clickhyperlinkfordetails)
Organization Agefornomarketing Ageformarketingofspecifiedproducts
Coca‐Cola <12*
Ferrero <12*
Mars <12****
GeneralMills/CPW 0‐6 6‐12
Nestlé 0‐6~ 6‐12~~
Unilever 0‐6 6‐12**
Kellogg 0‐6* 6‐12
+
Kraft 0‐6** 6‐11/12
++
**
Danone 0‐3 3‐12*
BurgerKing 0‐12***
PepsiCo 0‐12*
*≥50%ofaudiencemustbechildren;**≥35%ofaudiencemustbechildren;***≥30%ofaudiencemustbe
children.****≥25%ofaudiencemustbechildren.~unlessanadultispresent.~~unlessadults
predominate.
+
≥35%forsomeshowsand≥50%forothers.
++
11forprintmedia,otherwise12.
Whichproductscanbepromoted?
IntheUSAalargenumberofcompany‐promotedmodelshavebeenproposedfordefining
thenutritionalcriteriaforfoodstobemarketedtochildren
21
andasimilarproblemhas
ariseninEurope.Thenexttablegivesexamplesofnutrientmethodsfordefiningfoodsas
suitableformarketingtochildren,asproposedbysomeofthecompaniesintheEUpledge:
Table2Company‐setcriteriaforfoodstheycanmarkettochildren
Company Energy
(kcal)
Total
fat
Saturated
fat
Trans
fat
Added
sodium
Added
sugar
Notes
BurgerKing
perchild’s
meal
≤560 <30%
energy
<10%energy 0g≤660mg≤10%
energy
Noartificial
colourings,
flavourings
Kelloggper
serving
≤200‐ ≤2g 0g≤230mg≤12g Exceptionsfor
waffles.
GeneralMills
perserving
withoutmilk
<175‐ ≤1.7g‐≤200mg≤12g Wholegrain≥8g;
vitamins&minerals
≥15%RDAper100g
PepsiCoper
specified
amount
≤150
(snacks)
≤35%
energy
≤10%energy <0.5g≤150mg≤10%
energy
Cholesterol≤30mg;
exceptionsforsome
products
Unilever‐‐≤13%energy
and
≤33%of
totalfat
≤2%
energy
≤1,6
mg/kcal
≤7g/100g Totalsugars≤25%
energy;exceptions
forsomeproducts
Kraft Specificcriteriafordifferentfoodgroups.
Nestlé Specificcriteriafordifferentfoodgroups.
21
BetterBusinessBureauCouncil(2008)TheChildren’sFood&BeverageAdvertisingInitiativeInAction.See
/>8
Thefollowingtablegivessomeexamplesoffoodswhichcompaniesstatetheycanmarketto
childrenaccordingtotheirownnutritionalcriteria,andtheratingofthosefoodsunder
threegovernment‐ledcategorisationsystems:theUKOfcomRegulationsforTVmarketing
tochildren,
22
theNordicKeyholeschemefordefininghealthierfoodproducts
23
andthe
proposedUSInteragencyWorkingGroupschemeforvoluntaryrestrictionsonmarketingto
children
24
.
Table3Productcomparisonsofcriteriaallowingmarketing
Companyand
Product
Company
owncriteria
Ofcom
criteria
Keyhole
criteria
Interagency
criteria
Kellogg
CocoPops Yes No No No
ChocolateKRAVE Yes No No No
Ricicles Yes No No No
RiceKrispies Yes No No No
HoneyLoops Yes No No No
GeneralMills/CerealPartners
ChocolateLuckyCharms Yes No No No
Nestlé
Nesquikcereals Yes No No No
Chocapic Yes No No No
Cookiecrisp Yes No No No
Whichmedia?
Companiesdifferintheextentoftheircoverageforself‐regulatingtheirmarketing
messagestochildren,withsomeincludingproductplacement,useoflicensedcharacters
andtheirownbrandedsitesinthedefinitionofmarketing.Thedefinitionofwhat
constituteschild‐targetedmediavaries:forexampleNestlé
25
definesmarketingtochildren
asbeing‘amarketingactivitywhereadultsupervisionisnotpresent’andcommunicationin
media‘whereadultaudienceisnotpredominant’.
Thetablebelowshowssomeexamplesofthecoverageofcompanypledgesacrossmedia
includedunderself‐regulation.Notethatforsomemediathecompanies
imposecertain
22
UKOfficeofCommunications(Ofcom)2007.See
/> />ldren/nutlab/nutprofmod
23
DevelopedbytheSwedishNationalFoodAdministrationtodefinehealthierfoodproducts,andnowusedin
Sweden,NorwayandDenmark.See />andsee />keyhole‐food
24
FederalTradesCommission(2011)InteragencyWorkingGroupSeeksInputonProposedVoluntaryPrinciples
forMarketingFoodtoChildren.See />25
See />%20EU%20Pledge%20Nestle%20Commitment.pdf
9
criteriaonthepercentageoftheaudiencethatmustbecomprisedofchildreninorderfor
self‐regulationtobeapplicable–furtherdetailsareshowninTable1above.
Table4Companystatementsofmediaincludedinself‐regulation
Company TV,radio
Printed
media
Paidfor
adson
internet
Product
placement
Interactive
games
Licensed
characters
Coca‐Cola Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Danone Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
Ferrero Yes Yes Yes No No No
PepsiCo Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Nestlé Yes Yes Yes No No No
Kellogg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Kraft Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
Unilever Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yesin2012
BurgerKing Yes Yes Yes No No No
Mars Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Furthergapsincompany‐ledself‐regulation
Thissectionprovidessomeexamplesofadditionalconcernsraisedduringthisinvestigation.
Theexamplespicturedaretakenfromwebsitesactiveandavailableduringtheperiod
January‐June2011.
Company‐ownedwebsites
Whilemostcompaniesacknowledgetheneedtocontroladvertisingtochildrenusingpaid‐
foradvertisingonthird‐partysites,companiesdonotusuallyincludetheirownweb‐sites,
whichtheyseeaseditorialratherthanadvertising.Althoughsomegovernment‐approved
codes(e.g.theUKCAPCode)includecompany‐ownedsites,mostindustry‐wideadvertising
regulationsinEuropeancountriesdonot,andindustry‐ledpledgesgenerallydonotorare
ambiguousaboutwhattheyconsider‘advertising’ontheirownwebsites.Manycompanies
usetheirownsitestoattractchildrenwithgames,puzzles,clubsanddownloadablegifts,or
offerbrandedproductswhichchildrenmaypestertheirparentstobuy.
ExamplesbelowshowNesquikchildren’sgamesonacompany‐ownedsiteandanexample
ofM&Mspromotions(someareasofthesiteaskiftheviewer‘sageisabove12years).
10
Socialnetworkingsites
Thereisalsoa‘grey’areaconcerningtheusebycompaniesofthird‐partysocialnetworking
sitessuchasFacebooktopromotechild‐attractiveactivitieswithfood‐relatedbranding.An
exampleoftheuseofFacebookisshownbelow:
11
Generalisedbranding
Companiesdonotusuallyincludeintheirself‐regulationanycontrolsonthebrandingof
non‐foodproductswithfood‐relatedbrandidentities.Althoughcarryingnospecific
marketingmessage,theassociativeeffectcanbeapowerfulmarketingtool.
Theexamplebelowshowsaproductlikelytoappealtochildrenbrandedwithanimage
stronglyassociatedwithsweetenedbreakfastcereal(Kellogg’sFrosties)andlicensedby
ownerforuseontheproduct.
12
Schoolsandotherchildren’ssettings
Companiesmayallowthemselvestomarketinschoolsandotherplaceswherechildren
gather.Thiscantaketheformofbrandedgoodsandequipmentortheactivepromotionof
samplesandbrandedgiftsinschoolsettings.Indirectuseofschoolssettingsmaybefound
whenTVadvertisementsuseschoolsaslocationsforfilmingtheiradvertising.
Theexamplebelowshowsaplayareaforchildrensponsoredbyachocolatecompany
ownedbyNestléinGenevaairport(whichthecompanyhassinceacknowledgediscounter
toNestlépolicies)andtheuseofclassroomsettingsforTVadvertisinglocations(notin
Europe).
13
Characterlicensingandbrandequitycharacters
Althoughsomecompanieshaveagreedtoreducetheuseoflicensedcharacters(e.g.film
tie‐inssuchasShrekandToyStory)otherscontinuetousesuchmarketingdevices.
Examplesbelowshowlicensedcharactersfromfilms(Rio,Thor,KungFuPanda)usedto
promoteproductshighinsugarsorfats.NotethatKungFuPandaisbeingusedby
McDonald’s,acompanythathasnotjoinedtheEUpledgescheme.
14
Inaddition,mostcompaniesstillpermitthemselvestousecharacterswhichtheyownand
havedevelopedwiththeirbrands(knownasbrand‐equitycharacters),suchasQuikythe
bunny(Nesquik)andTonytheTiger(Frosties).OthersincludeUnileverWalls‘Maxthelion’
(seepicturebelow).
15
Productdesignandpackaging
Self‐regulationgenerallydoesnotincludepackagingorproductdesignandthesecanbe
powerfulmarketingtoolstoattractpurchases.Theexamplebelowshowsaproductshaped,
flavouredandtexturedtoappealtochildreninaboxwithatie‐ingamelaunchedby
Kellogg’sonFacebookandfeaturingtheKraveKrusader(whomustovercomechallenges
andobstaclestoreachchocolate).
26
Shopdisplays
Retaildisplaysarerarelyincludedincompany‐ledself‐regulation.Aisle‐enddisplaysand
check‐outdisplaysarepremiumsitesandcanbeamajorinfluenceonspontaneous
purchasesand,especiallyinthecaseofcheck‐outdisplays,thepurchaseofanitemforced
uponaparentbychildrentakingtheproductintheirhandswhilewaitinginline.
Child‐to‐childmarketing
Peerrecommendationisastrongmotivatoramongchildrenandadolescents.Marketersare
usinganumberofmethodsforencouragingchild‐to‐childmarketing,includingpaymentsto
youngpeopletomakerecommendationsandencouragementofchildrentomaketheirown
26
See />gaming/3026796.article
16
promotionalmaterialsfordistribution,e.g.onsocialmedianetworks.Self‐regulation
generallydoesnotcoverchild‐to‐childmarketing.
Examplesbelowshowbrand‐owned,child‐attractivewebsitesaskingchildrentosendemail
messagestotheirfriendsaboutthewebsite.NotethatHaribohasnotjoinedtheEUpledge
scheme.
Newtechnology
Methodsformarketingtochildrenarerapidlyevolving,andmanyaredesignedtoby‐pass
parentsorenhancechild‐to‐childmarketing.In2007KFC’sadvertisingagencyengineereda
TVcommercialcontaininghigh‐pitchednoiseswhichonlyyoungpeoplearelikelytohear–
17
andfollowedthisupwithawebsiteofferingfreemealvoucherstothosewhocanidentify
thepointintheadvertisementwhenthenoiseoccurred.
27
Morerecently,MicrosoftannouncedtechnologytoallowX‐Boxplayerstousevoicecontrols
duringgamingwhichwouldforwardadvertisingmessagestotheirfriend’sphoneswhenever
marketingpromotionswerepresentinthegame.
28
27
EBlass />commercial/
28
TVega,NewYorkTimes20June2011.See
/>
18
Proposedstandards
Asnotedearlier,theobjectiveofuniversalstandardsistoinstituteruleswhichachieve
maximumprotectionwhileremainingpracticalandeconomicalinapplication.Althoughit
couldbeproposedthatchildrenshouldnotbeexposedtoanymarketing,thepresent
documenttakesa‘risk‐based’approachtoreducingexposuretothemarketingoffoodand
beverageproductswhoseregularconsumptionisliabletoincreasetheriskofnon‐
communicablediseases.
Furthermore,itisimportanttoidentifyexamplesofhighstandardsforcross‐border
marketingwhichhavebeenproposedasaresultofconsensus‐buildingbyreputable
agencies,thusindicatingthatsuchstandardsarefeasible,practicalandeconomical.
Inthissectionweproposestandardsbasedonaresponsibleapproachtomarketingonthe
understandingthatchildrenshouldnotbesubjectedtoinducementstoconsumeproducts
which,ifconsumedroutinely,arelikelytobedetrimentaltotheirhealth.Whereavailable
weshowexamplesoftheuseofsimilarstandardsinothersectors.
Standard1:Specifyingthefoodsandbeverages
Issue:Thepromotionofsomefoodsandbeveragescanunderminechildren’sdietaryhealth.
Proposal:Riskreductionmeanspromotingonlythosefoodandbeverageproductswhich
conformtonationaldietaryguidelinesandinternationalstandardssupportingtheWHO
GlobalStrategyonDiet,PhysicalActivityandHealth
29
.
Ahighstandard:Foodandbeveragesshouldbecategorisedaccordingtoavalidated
nutrientprofilingsystem.ExamplesmayincludetheUKOfcommodelusedtoregulate
advertisingontelevision,
30
theNordicKeyholefoodcategorisationmodel,
31
ortheproposals
fromtheUSInteragencyWorkingGroup
32
.
Standard2:Agegroups
Issue:Somemarketingworksbelowconsciouscontrol.Evenwhenchildrenandadolescents
areawareofmarketing,theymaybetrustinganduncriticalofthemessages.Medialiteracy
doesnotreducemarketingmessageimpact.
Proposal:Riskreductionmeanspromotingonlytothosepersonswhohavereachedanage
whentheyarelegallyconsideredtobecompetentenoughtoprotecttheirownwelfare.
29
WorldHealthOrganization,2004See
/>30
UKOfficeofCommunications(Ofcom)2007.See
/> />ldren/nutlab/nutprofmod
31
See />32
FederalTradesCommission(2011)InteragencyWorkingGroupSeeksInputonProposedVoluntaryPrinciples
forMarketingFoodtoChildren.See />19
Permittedtargetagegroupsshouldbesignificantlyolderthanthisinor dertoavoid
appealingtoyoungerages.
Ahighstandard:Theageorlegalmajorityisdeterminedbylocallegislation.Permitted
targetagegroupsshouldbesignificantlyabovetheminimumlegalage:anexampleisthe
banontargetingalcoholicbeveragestopeopleunderage25requiredbyFacebookinIndia
andSweden.
33
Forfoodandbeverages,theUKOfcomregulationsapplyduringtelevision
programmeswhichappealtochildrenunderage16.
Standard3:Mediausedformarketingmessages
Issue:Childrenhaveaccesstoawiderangeofmedia.Inaddition,cross‐bordermedia
servicesarenoteasilycontrolledbythejurisdictionintheterritorywherethemessageis
received.
Proposal:Riskreductionmeansincludingallmediawhichcarrymarketingmessagesaswell
asthosewhichcrossnationalborders
(e.g.Internet,satelliteandcableTV,andexportedTV
programmes,films,games,toysandotherproducts).Foodpackaging,formulationand
presentationareincluded,asaresponsoredsportseventsandproductplacements.
Ahighstandard:Acomprehensiveapproachassumesallmediaunlessspecifically
exempted.Mediabroadcastacrossseveraltimezonesshouldbe
assumedtoreachchildren
andadolescents.ExamplesfromothersectorsincludeFacebook,whichprohibitstobacco
andgamblingmarketingandrestrictsalcoholmarketing.
34
Fortobacco,theFramework
ConventiononTobaccoControlprovidesacomprehensivedefinition:‘allformsof
commercialcommunication,recommendationoractionandanyformofcontributiontoan
event,activityorindividual’.
35
Standard4:Marketingmethods
Issue:Mostmarketingworksbelowconsciousawareness,andchildreninparticularmaybe
vulnerabletomarketingmessagesofspecialappealtothem.Manymarketingmethodsfall
outsidecurrentadvertisingregulations.
Proposal:Riskreductionmeansexcludingtechniqueswithspecialappealtochildrenand
adolescents.Thisincludestheuseofcartooncharacters,
animation,celebrities,sports
personalities,andthecolouring,shapinganddesignofproductsandpackaginglikelytohave
aparticularappealtochildrenandadolescents.
Ahighstandard:Acomprehensiveapproachacknowledgesthatchildrenandadolescents
areexposedtomanymarketingmessages,includingthosedesignedtoattractthemand
thosedesignedtotargetnon‐childaudiences.Fortobacco,theFrameworkConvention
36
coversactionswhichhavethe‘aim,effect,orlikelyeffectofpromotingatobaccoproductor
33
/>34
/>35
/>36
/>20
tobaccouseeitherdirectlyorindirectly’.Itspecifiesall‘advertising,promotionand
sponsorship’.Forbreast‐milksubstitutes,theInternationalCode
37
specifiesthatcontrols
applyto‘productpromotion,distribution,selling,advertising,productpublicrelations,and
informationservices’.Thesephrasescanbeadaptedwiththeadditionof‘abletoinfluencea
child’.
Standard5:Useofbrands
Issue:Productsandmediamaycarryabrandidentityforacompanylinkedtofoodor
beverageproductswithoutspecifyingafoodorbeverageorgivinganexplicitmarketing
message.
Proposal:Riskreductionmeansbrandswithrecognisablelinkstofoodandbeverage
productsneedtobetreatedasiftheywerepromotingthefoodorbeveragetowhichthey
areassociated.
Ahighstandard:Acomprehensiveapproachrestrictstheuseofbrandpromotionlikelyto
influencechildrenwhenthatbrandhasarecognisableassociationwithfoodanddrink
productssubjecttomarketingrestrictions.Wherebrandslinktomultipleproducts,the
assumptionshouldbethatthebrandispromotingthemostfamiliarorhighestsellingofits
products.ProposalsfromtheAustralianObesityPolicyCoalitionsuggestthatbrandsshould
berestrictedunlesstheyarebeingusedinapromotionforahealthyfoodproductor
range.
38
‘Brand’meansthenameofafoodorbeverageproductorrangeofproducts,orthe
manufacturerordistributorthereof,oranyotherwords,designsorimagesthatareclosely
associatedwithsuchproducts.
Standard6:Settingsandlocations
Issue:Authoritiesresponsibleforstandardswherechildrenaregathered,suchasschools
andchildcarefacilities,haveadutytoensurethatnothingprejudicesachild’swellbeing.
Proposal:Riskreductionmeansthatallsettingswherechildrengathershouldbefreefrom
thepromotionofspecifiedfoodandbeverages,includingbrands,logos,vouchersandgifts
associatedwithsuchproducts.
Ahighstandard:Acomprehensiveapproachavoidstheneedtospecifyeverypossible
setting.TheWHORecommendationsstate“settingsinclude,butarenotlimitedto,
nurseries,schools,schoolgroundsandpre‐schoolcentres,playgrounds,familyandchild
clinicsandpaediatricservices,andduringanysportingandculturalactivitiesthatareheld
onthesepremises”.
39
Foralcohol,theCityofSanDiego,California,adoptedanordinancein
October2000whichprohibitsadvertisingalcoholonanybillboardwithin1,000feetofany
37
/>38
/>39
/>21
school,playground,recreationcentreorfacility,childcarecentre,arcade,orlibrary.
40
There
arealsomanyexamplesoflocation‐basedtobaccocontrols.
41
Standard7:Accountability
Issue:Marketingmessagesareproducedanddistributedbydiversestakeholdersincluding
foodproducers,manufacturers,importersorsellers,advertisingagencies,media
companies,mediadistributorsandretailers,webcontenthosts,webaccessprovidersand
websearchengines.
Proposal:Riskreductionrequiresthatadutyofcareandattentiontotheprotectionof
childrenandadolescentsshouldbeexercisedbyallpartiesinthedisseminationof
marketingmessages.
Ahighstandard:Acomprehensiveapproachwouldholdallpartiesinvolvedinconveyinga
marketingmessagetobeaccountable.Forsponsorshipmediathisincludessportsevent
hosts.Forpromotionaltechniquesembodiedinafoodproductthis
includesimporters,
retailersandcaterers.Cross‐bordermarketingstandardsneedtobeenforceablethrough
internationalagreementswithsanctions.Examplesofpossiblestandard‐settingmechanisms
includeWHOhealthregulations,ISOstandardsandCodexAlimentariusstandards.
40
/>shelters‐and
41
/>22
Appendix
WorldHealthOrganization
SetofRecommendationsontheMarketingofFoodsandNon‐alcoholic
BeveragestoChildren
42
Rationale
1. The policy aim should be to reduce the impact on children of marketing of foods
high in saturated fats, trans-fatty acids, free sugars, or salt.
2. Given that the effectiveness of marketing is a function of exposure and power, the
overall policy objective should be to reduce both the exposure of children to, and
power of, marketing of foods high in saturated fats, trans -fatty acids, free sugars, or
salt.
Policy development
3. To achieve the policy aim and objective, Member States should consider different
approaches, i.e. stepwise or comprehensive, to reduce marketing of foods high in
saturated fats, trans -fatty acids, free sugars, or salt, to children.
4. Governments should set clear definitions for the key components of the policy,
thereby allowing for a standard implementation process. The setting of clear
definitions would facilitate uniform implementation, irrespective of the implementing
body. When setting the key definitions Member States need to identify and address
any specific national challenges so as to derive the maximal impact of the policy.
5. Settings where children gather should be free from all forms of marketing of foods
high in saturated fats, trans -fatty acids, free sugars, or salt. Such settings include, but
are not limited to, nurseries, schools, school grounds and pre-school centres,
playgrounds, family and child clinics and paediatric services and during any sporting
and cultural activities that are held on these premises.
6. Governments should be the key stakeholders in the development of policy and
provide leadership, through a multi-stakeholder platform, for implementation,
monitoring and evaluation. In setting the national policy framework, governments
may choose to allocate defined roles to other stakeholders, while protecting the public
interest and avoiding conflict of interest.
42
Fulldocumentavailableat />