New Zealand has an unacceptably high prevalence of childhood obesity,1 and the Minister of Health, Dr Jonathan Coleman, has made it one of his priorities to reduce this rate through the government’s childhood obesity plan.2 Achieving this goal will require a significant reduction in the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children and young people.
The WHO Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity, which is co-chaired by the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, had its report3 endorsed by all Member States, including New Zealand, at the World Health Assembly in May 2016. This report supports a strong regulatory approach to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children, as do New Zealand public health experts.4,5
In 2015, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the industry body responsible for the self-regulatory codes on advertising, pre-empted the launch of the government’s 22-point plan2 by announcing a review of the two ASA codes which relate to advertising to children. In September 2016, the ASA’s independent Review Panel submitted its report to the ASA Board, recommending including the amended code provisions to be included into a new single, combined ASA code.6 Dr Coleman commented that the revised ASA code would make significant improvements to protect children and young people from exposure to the marketing of unhealthy food products.7 This analysis critically assesses whether the revised ASA code will achieve that outcome.
The ASA Review Panel received 91 submissions, including 52 from public health and nutrition organisations that called for substantially strengthened codes, and 15 from the food and beverage industry sector, which largely opposed stronger codes.8 For example, the Food and Grocery Council called for a lowering of the age to which the ASA code would apply from 14 years to 12 years.9 Six weeks after the release of the Review Panel report, ASA asked submitters to comment once again on two issues: the nutrient profiling system to use (see point 6 below) and the definition of targeting children (see point 7 below).
Although there is no evidence that industry-controlled, voluntary codes are effective in reducing marketing to children,10 public health groups actively participated in the ASA review in the hope of strong outcomes. A group of over 70 health professors provided a submission with eight outcomes (in bold below) that they would use to assess the strength of the revised code.11 How well does the proposed new code meet these outcomes?
Table 1: Suggested criteria, by media type, for determining if the timing and placement of marketing of unhealthy foods is likely to result in significant exposure to children.
From our assessment, the revised ASA code cannot be expected to have a significant effect on restricting unhealthy food marketing to children and young people, and there is no indication that independent monitoring will be implemented to assess the code’s effects. The code reflects problems endemic to self-regulation where commercial interests conflict with public interests,10,16 and falls far below current international best practice.17
In summary, we recognise the ASA’s initiative in instigating a review of its codes, but we consider that, while the proposed code appears to be a small step in the right direction, it does not provide adequate protection of children and young people’s interests. A further potentially serious downside is that the revised ASA code will be given as a reason by the Government for not implementing the regulations that would effectively reduce children and young people’s exposure to marketing of unhealthy foods.
In our view, the Review Panel has missed a major opportunity to introduce meaningful changes that would help to reduce childhood obesity. Government regulation is urgently needed to create a policy framework which privileges children’s health and well-being above commercial interests.
Figure 1: Numbers of children aged 5–13 years (solid bars) and 14–18 years (striped bars) in weekdays (grey bars) and weekend days (black bars) watching television (all channels combined).
Reducing the exposure of children and young people to the marketing of unhealthy foods is a core strategy for reducing the high overweight and obesity prevalence in this population. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has recently reviewed its self-regulatory codes and proposed a revised single code on advertising to children. This article evaluates the proposed code against eight criteria for an effective code, which were included in a submission to the ASA review process from over 70 New Zealand health professors. The evaluation found that the proposed code largely represents no change or uncertain change from the existing codes, and cannot be expected to provide substantial protection for children and young people from the marketing of unhealthy foods. Government regulations will be needed to achieve this important outcome.
New Zealand has an unacceptably high prevalence of childhood obesity,1 and the Minister of Health, Dr Jonathan Coleman, has made it one of his priorities to reduce this rate through the government’s childhood obesity plan.2 Achieving this goal will require a significant reduction in the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children and young people.
The WHO Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity, which is co-chaired by the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, had its report3 endorsed by all Member States, including New Zealand, at the World Health Assembly in May 2016. This report supports a strong regulatory approach to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children, as do New Zealand public health experts.4,5
In 2015, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the industry body responsible for the self-regulatory codes on advertising, pre-empted the launch of the government’s 22-point plan2 by announcing a review of the two ASA codes which relate to advertising to children. In September 2016, the ASA’s independent Review Panel submitted its report to the ASA Board, recommending including the amended code provisions to be included into a new single, combined ASA code.6 Dr Coleman commented that the revised ASA code would make significant improvements to protect children and young people from exposure to the marketing of unhealthy food products.7 This analysis critically assesses whether the revised ASA code will achieve that outcome.
The ASA Review Panel received 91 submissions, including 52 from public health and nutrition organisations that called for substantially strengthened codes, and 15 from the food and beverage industry sector, which largely opposed stronger codes.8 For example, the Food and Grocery Council called for a lowering of the age to which the ASA code would apply from 14 years to 12 years.9 Six weeks after the release of the Review Panel report, ASA asked submitters to comment once again on two issues: the nutrient profiling system to use (see point 6 below) and the definition of targeting children (see point 7 below).
Although there is no evidence that industry-controlled, voluntary codes are effective in reducing marketing to children,10 public health groups actively participated in the ASA review in the hope of strong outcomes. A group of over 70 health professors provided a submission with eight outcomes (in bold below) that they would use to assess the strength of the revised code.11 How well does the proposed new code meet these outcomes?
Table 1: Suggested criteria, by media type, for determining if the timing and placement of marketing of unhealthy foods is likely to result in significant exposure to children.
From our assessment, the revised ASA code cannot be expected to have a significant effect on restricting unhealthy food marketing to children and young people, and there is no indication that independent monitoring will be implemented to assess the code’s effects. The code reflects problems endemic to self-regulation where commercial interests conflict with public interests,10,16 and falls far below current international best practice.17
In summary, we recognise the ASA’s initiative in instigating a review of its codes, but we consider that, while the proposed code appears to be a small step in the right direction, it does not provide adequate protection of children and young people’s interests. A further potentially serious downside is that the revised ASA code will be given as a reason by the Government for not implementing the regulations that would effectively reduce children and young people’s exposure to marketing of unhealthy foods.
In our view, the Review Panel has missed a major opportunity to introduce meaningful changes that would help to reduce childhood obesity. Government regulation is urgently needed to create a policy framework which privileges children’s health and well-being above commercial interests.
Figure 1: Numbers of children aged 5–13 years (solid bars) and 14–18 years (striped bars) in weekdays (grey bars) and weekend days (black bars) watching television (all channels combined).
Reducing the exposure of children and young people to the marketing of unhealthy foods is a core strategy for reducing the high overweight and obesity prevalence in this population. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has recently reviewed its self-regulatory codes and proposed a revised single code on advertising to children. This article evaluates the proposed code against eight criteria for an effective code, which were included in a submission to the ASA review process from over 70 New Zealand health professors. The evaluation found that the proposed code largely represents no change or uncertain change from the existing codes, and cannot be expected to provide substantial protection for children and young people from the marketing of unhealthy foods. Government regulations will be needed to achieve this important outcome.
New Zealand has an unacceptably high prevalence of childhood obesity,1 and the Minister of Health, Dr Jonathan Coleman, has made it one of his priorities to reduce this rate through the government’s childhood obesity plan.2 Achieving this goal will require a significant reduction in the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children and young people.
The WHO Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity, which is co-chaired by the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, had its report3 endorsed by all Member States, including New Zealand, at the World Health Assembly in May 2016. This report supports a strong regulatory approach to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children, as do New Zealand public health experts.4,5
In 2015, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the industry body responsible for the self-regulatory codes on advertising, pre-empted the launch of the government’s 22-point plan2 by announcing a review of the two ASA codes which relate to advertising to children. In September 2016, the ASA’s independent Review Panel submitted its report to the ASA Board, recommending including the amended code provisions to be included into a new single, combined ASA code.6 Dr Coleman commented that the revised ASA code would make significant improvements to protect children and young people from exposure to the marketing of unhealthy food products.7 This analysis critically assesses whether the revised ASA code will achieve that outcome.
The ASA Review Panel received 91 submissions, including 52 from public health and nutrition organisations that called for substantially strengthened codes, and 15 from the food and beverage industry sector, which largely opposed stronger codes.8 For example, the Food and Grocery Council called for a lowering of the age to which the ASA code would apply from 14 years to 12 years.9 Six weeks after the release of the Review Panel report, ASA asked submitters to comment once again on two issues: the nutrient profiling system to use (see point 6 below) and the definition of targeting children (see point 7 below).
Although there is no evidence that industry-controlled, voluntary codes are effective in reducing marketing to children,10 public health groups actively participated in the ASA review in the hope of strong outcomes. A group of over 70 health professors provided a submission with eight outcomes (in bold below) that they would use to assess the strength of the revised code.11 How well does the proposed new code meet these outcomes?
Table 1: Suggested criteria, by media type, for determining if the timing and placement of marketing of unhealthy foods is likely to result in significant exposure to children.
From our assessment, the revised ASA code cannot be expected to have a significant effect on restricting unhealthy food marketing to children and young people, and there is no indication that independent monitoring will be implemented to assess the code’s effects. The code reflects problems endemic to self-regulation where commercial interests conflict with public interests,10,16 and falls far below current international best practice.17
In summary, we recognise the ASA’s initiative in instigating a review of its codes, but we consider that, while the proposed code appears to be a small step in the right direction, it does not provide adequate protection of children and young people’s interests. A further potentially serious downside is that the revised ASA code will be given as a reason by the Government for not implementing the regulations that would effectively reduce children and young people’s exposure to marketing of unhealthy foods.
In our view, the Review Panel has missed a major opportunity to introduce meaningful changes that would help to reduce childhood obesity. Government regulation is urgently needed to create a policy framework which privileges children’s health and well-being above commercial interests.
Figure 1: Numbers of children aged 5–13 years (solid bars) and 14–18 years (striped bars) in weekdays (grey bars) and weekend days (black bars) watching television (all channels combined).
Reducing the exposure of children and young people to the marketing of unhealthy foods is a core strategy for reducing the high overweight and obesity prevalence in this population. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has recently reviewed its self-regulatory codes and proposed a revised single code on advertising to children. This article evaluates the proposed code against eight criteria for an effective code, which were included in a submission to the ASA review process from over 70 New Zealand health professors. The evaluation found that the proposed code largely represents no change or uncertain change from the existing codes, and cannot be expected to provide substantial protection for children and young people from the marketing of unhealthy foods. Government regulations will be needed to achieve this important outcome.
The full contents of this pages only available to subscribers.
Login, subscribe or email nzmj@nzma.org.nz to purchase this article.