Children and Obesity: The Role of Food Marketing.

References: Matthews, A. (2007) 'Children and obesity: a pan-European project examining the role of food marketing.', European Journal of Public Health, Vol 18, Issue 1, Pages 7-11.

Here is an extract from an article I found on what part food marketers play on childhood obesity. It is a european study which uses questionnaires and data-collection relating to food promotion to children on 20 european countries. Results showed that unhealthy foods such as savoury snacks and confectionary were the most commonly marketed and consumed items by children. Television marketing was found to be the most commonly used promotional medium, but in-school and internet marketing were seen as growth areas. Only a few of the 20 countries reported the use of media literacy programmes designed to counterbalance the effects of food marketing to children, which means there aren't many people out there who are fighting this battle. The pattern of regulation discovered during this research was ineffective and incoherent because of the different restrictions each country had. Some have tough bans in place and others have nothing at all. Most health, consumer and public interest groups supported the point that restrictions need to be put in place, whereas industry and media groups advocated self-regulation.

The article's recommendations include the amendment of the European Union’s Television Without Frontiers Directive to ban all TV advertising of unhealthy food to children, the adoption of a commonly agreed European Union definition of an ‘unhealthy’ food, and the establishment of a mechanism for pan-European monitoring of the nature and extent of food marketing to children and its regulation.

A recent estimate that 20% of school-age children in Europe are carrying excess body fat (with a quarter of these being obese), poses an increasing risk of them developing chronic diseases with a significant likelihood of some having multiple risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, Type 2 diabetes and other co-morbidities before or during early adulthood.1 These risks are not uniform between European member states with children at particular risk in the countries around the Mediterranean and in the British Isles (see figure 1), although rising prevalence rates are occurring in all countries. Within the enlarged European Union (EU) of 2006, there are estimated to be almost 22 million overweight or obese children (about 30% of all children), and this figure is increasing by around 1.2 million each year. Of these children, 5.1 million are obese, and that figure is rising by some 300 000 children each year.2 

Phase 1 focused on one aspect of the cause of obesity—the marketing of food to children, in particular examining ‘promotion’ as a central element within marketing. Its aims were to
(i) Undertake a literature search of relevant existing international evidence.
(ii) Organize EHN national co-ordinators to collect data from the 20 European project countries: Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK. Information gathered related to food marketing to children, the regulatory environment and measures taken to compensate for any negative effects of the marketing.
(iii) Analyse the data and make recommendations about food marketing to children across Europe.

Defining unhealthy foods

In order to contextualize the nature of food marketing to children, co-ordinators were asked to report on any working definitions of unhealthy foods existing within each country. In countries where no definitions existed, co-ordinators reported their difficulty in agreeing what was meant by an ‘unhealthy’ food. Within the project there was a general assumption that such foods are high in fat, sugar or salt and that these foods are more likely to contribute to an unhealthy diet, but most countries had no working nutrient criteria which would have assisted such a definition.

Type and amount of food marketing to children
The data showed that food advertisements during children’s TV overwhelmingly promoted ‘unhealthy’ foods, with very little promotion of fruit and vegetables and other ‘healthy’ foods. The extent of unhealthy food marketing to children varied between countries with estimates ranging from 49% in Italy to nearly 100% in Denmark and the UK.
Advertisers spend a large and increasing proportions of their budgets on the food sector, illustrated by the following examples:

1. (i)  In the UK £743 million was spent on food and drinks advertising in 2003,4 with the total amount spent on food marketing increasing.5
   
2. (ii)  In Germany, 87% of total food advertising spend is on television advertising.6
   
3. (iii)  In The Netherlands advertising spending by the food industry as a whole grew by 128% between 1994 and 2003.7
   

Of concern was the volume of food advertising aimed at children. For example within the UK, children viewed an average of five television advertisements per day for Core Category pro- ducts (food, soft drinks and chain restaurants),8 the vast majority of which were for food items considered to be unhealthy in having a nutritional content high in fat, salt or sugar.5
Across countries, commonly used creative strategies used by food advertisers when targeting children included linking into children’s culture by referencing movies and their characters, and by using child-related appeals to play, fun, action-adventure, humour, magic or fantasy. Many advertisements make use of cartoon or celebrity characters.

Recent UK statistics suggest that though spending on advertising in the food sector may be increasing, the proportion spent on TV advertisements may be declining. Nonetheless, across countries where data was reported, the vast majority of food promotion was through television, with food promotion through radio, magazines and cinemas taking a low and possibly declining proportion of advertising spending. Schools, on the other hand, represented a growing marketing channel. Strategies included sponsoring events, linking food product purchasing to the provision of educational or sporting equipment often involving token collection schemes, and selling unhealthy food and drink products in vending machines. The Internet was also a new and growing medium, where creative strategies included cartoon-style games, competitions, educational materials and links to food company websites.

Attitudes towards food marketing to children
Reported data showed that health, consumer and other citizen groups acknowledged that obesity had many causes, but food marketing in particular was seen to play a significant role, thus raising the need to protect children in the interests of public health. The Danish Nutrition Council,9 for example, favoured restricting unhealthy food advertising to children as one element within a broader obesity prevention strategy. Similar groups favoured either banning or further restricting the marketing to children of foods high in fat, sugar or salt. Public interest groups also recommended other measures including nutrition and media education, taxing unhealthy foods and improving nutrition labelling.

On the other hand, the food and advertising industries defended their right to promote their products and they resisted proposed restrictions—attitudes which reflected their commer- cial aims. They opposed plans to ban food marketing to children, arguing for the removal of bans where they existed, and opposing the tightening of existing restrictions, warning governments that restrictions would harm trade and commerce. 

Across the EU, governments’ responses to these conflicting pressures have varied from tough regulations in a few countries to a more ‘laissez-faire’ approach in the majority of countries. In some countries, such as Germany, Spain and the UK, governments are trying to persuade the food and advertising industry to voluntarily restrict their activities, for example, by ‘responsible’ self-regulation and by challenging them to introduce social marketing techniques to promote healthier food. Governments in other countries are focusing on restricting food marketing in schools, for example, in Finland, where this influence is perceived as a key area of concern, and Greece, where a lack of agreed definitions for ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’ foods is inhibiting efforts to remove unhealthy food products from schools. Where countries have already banned food marketing to children on TV, governments are focusing on other areas, e.g. Norway is advocating a ban on cinema advertising, and Sweden is calling for an international ban on TV advertising to children.

Co-ordinators reported counterbalancing measures which although designed to improve children’s health or specifically tackle childhood obesity, nevertheless were also perceived to combat the effects of food marketing to children. Measures reported included fruit and vegetable promotion, general educational measures focusing on food and health, media literacy and physical activity programmes.

Fruit and vegetable promotion schemes were reported by most national co-ordinators. Many of these schemes advocated the consumption of at least five portions of fruit or vegetables a day. Many fruit and vegetable promotion schemes operated in schools, offering educational programmes, information and materials, tasting sessions and free or low cost fresh fruit and vegetables.

Most countries reported a variety of measures to promote physical activity—including projects run by or sponsored by food companies. From the companies’ perspective, such projects boosted their public image and deflected attention away from marketing activities which promoted ‘unhealthy’ food.

It is clear that food manufacturers are increasingly using integrated and sophisticated marketing strategies to promote their products directly and indirectly to children, which has also been found in other international research.11,12 Global commercial marketing to children of food and drink is dominated by unhealthy products, with television as the prime medium for such advertising.13–15 The data here concurs with these findings, but there was some evidence that television is losing its dominance as in-school and internet marketing are growing.

Strategies used to counterbalance this effect included fruit and vegetable promotion, and food, health and physical activity education programmes. Media literacy programmes, often held up by the food industry as the means by which children can be helped to a critical understanding of advertising, were found in only a handful of countries and very few had been evaluated. None had been designed and implemented as an integrated programme.

The attitudes of stakeholders revealed varying levels of responsibility with regard to food marketing to children. There was widespread agreement amongst health, consumer and other public interest groups that food marketing to children should be restricted across Europe. These views juxtaposed with those of the food and media industries which, whilst recognizing the vulnerability of children, argued that self-regulation was more effective than statutory restrictions which would only limit economic growth. Government responses to these debates varied between some adopting tough restrictions and others who sought to persuade industry to act responsibly.

This study concurred with previous research in showing that most European countries have an incoherent patchwork of legal and voluntary controls. This situation compromises the efforts of some countries who have strong national regulations but who are nevertheless powerless to prevent commercial communications arriving in their country from beyond their borders. For example, Sweden and Norway have statutorily banned TV advertising to children but receive advertisements on cable and satellite TV broadcast from other countries. The first recommendation to remedy these inconsistencies would be the amendment of the EU’s Television Without Frontiers Directive to bring about a ban all TV advertising of unhealthy food to children. Such a move would protect the effect of bans within individual countries and extend this protection to the rest of Europe’s children. Additional measures to control ‘unhealthy’ food marketing in schools and on the Internet are also needed. 


The marketing strategies used to promote products directly to children is increasing. This wouldn't be such a problem if healthy food was dominating, but of course it isn't. Television is the most used platform for advertising to children, however it is starting to lose it's dominance as in-school and internet marketing is on the rise. I feel as though in-school and internet marketing is going to become even more persuasive then television as they have much more potential to do more and have the children interact with their promotions. With children using technology more and more, most of them have access to the internet throughout the day—especially in schools where they have computer access. 

There have been some efforts to counterbalance the effects of marketing to children such as fruit and vegetable promotion, and food, health and physical activity education programmes. I feel as though these programmes do help in raising the awareness to children that they do need to eat healthily and have a physically active lifestyle, especially now they aren't going out as much as they play computer games! There has also been a handful of countries that have media literacy programmes in place that aim to help children understand advertising and how it works. More definitely needs to be done, especially if countries only want self-regulation in place. 

There is a big problem for the countries which do impose bans on tv advertising to children. Of course, they have a ban in place and their own tv networks have to abide by these rules, but the countries have tv broadcasting from other countries which do not have these bans in place and do not have to follow the rules. This means that they are still being exposed to ads directed to children, even with their bans in place. This problem could be solved by every country having to follow the same ban and therefore no countries rules would be broken.