Limiting Children's Food Ads.

References: References: Barnes, B. (2007) 'Limiting Ads of Junk Food To Children.', The New York Times, Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/business/18food.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 (Accessed: Wednesday 14 October 2015).

This article talks about the steps food companies have taken/are going to take in order to avoid government regulation coming into place. It is from 2007 but gives me a good idea of the kind of small changes the companies are willing to make in order to take a step towards reducing childhood obesity. 

Trying to persuade critics the industry does not need government regulation, 11 big food companies, including McDonald’s, Campbell Soup and PepsiCo, have agreed to stop advertising to children under 12 products that do not meet certain nutritional standards. Some of the companies, like Coca-Cola, have already withdrawn all such commercials or are in the process of doing so. Others, like General Mills, said they would withdraw them over the next year or so, while a handful agreed to expand their self-imposed bans to radio, print and Internet advertising.

General Mills will no longer be advertising Trix to the 12-and-under crowd, it will continue to peddle Cocoa Puffs, which have one less gram of sugar per serving. And it will be able to continue advertising Trix on television shows and other media that are considered to cater to “families” rather than just children.

That qualifier amounts to a major loophole, given the media-watching habits of children. An episode of Nickelodon’s “SpongeBob SquarePants,” for instance, is viewed by an average audience of 876,000 children age 6 to 11, according to Nielsen Media Research, and falls in the category of shows that are off-limits to ads for junk food. But “American Idol” from Fox, which qualifies as a family show, attracts 2.1 million children in the age group.

“This is great public relations for the companies, but it doesn’t go nearly far enough,” said Susan Linn, co-founder of the Boston-based group Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood. “It is going to be impossible to monitor if the companies are actually doing what they say.”

To some degree, the pledges appeared to be an effort by the food companies to get out in front of a forthcoming government study on childhood obesity.

The financial impact of the pledges on television networks like Nickelodeon, ABC Family and Cartoon Network will depend on how well the food companies can tweak their products. Many of the companies are not automatically withdrawing their products from the airwaves; rather, they are trying to reformulate the foods to meet nutritional guidelines. If they cannot do so to their satisfaction, they say they will replace ads for so-called junk foods with spots for healthier alternatives.

Cadbury Adams, the maker of Bubblicious chewing gum, says it will either withdraw advertisements of the brand from certain media or will direct half of its current Bubblicious budget to the promotion of healthier eating habits. The company declined to specify how much it spends promoting Bubblicious each year, but said that a healthier habit might be choosing a smaller portion of gum.

MTV Networks, which owns Nickelodeon and other channels popular with younger viewers, expects the agreements to have minimal impact on its bottom line. “Many products sold by these companies haven’t been on our air for years,” said Jim Perry, executive vice president for ad sales at Nickelodeon and MTV Networks Kids and Family Group. Marva Smalls, executive vice president for Nickelodeon public affairs, added, “We have been on the road pressing for this.”

Under PepsiCo’s pledge, only two products can be marketed to children under 12, according to Lynn Markley, vice president for health and wellness. They are Baked Cheetos, which have 50 percent less fat than regular Cheetos, and Gatorade. In the case of Gatorade, the company says the brand will sponsor ads that give tips to children on participating in sports. The product itself will not be pictured.

PepsiCo’s commitment will also translate to a diminished role for Cap’n Crunch, the familiar mascot of the cereal made by the company’s Quaker Oats division. Ms. Markley said that the Cap’n will remain on cereal boxes but that as of Jan. 1, 2008, he will not appear in any television, print, Internet or other advertising to children under 12. This will mean an end to his interactive arcade-style game for children at www.capncrunch.com.

Other companies agreed in their pledges to limit their use of licensed characters like SpongeBob or Scooby-Doo.

Deborah Platt Majoras, the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, called the various pledges “a significant step” and urged more food makers to join the effort. “While changes in food marketing alone will not solve the nation’s childhood obesity problem, these actions will help make a healthy choice the easy choice,” she said in a statement.

Efforts to curtail junk food advertisements started escalating about three years ago, as evidence of the problem of child obesity started mounting. Food companies, concluding that the issue would not go away and fearing the kind of government scrutiny given to tobacco companies, started trying to police themselves.

Kraft was an early leader. In January 2005, the company said it would stop advertising products like Oreos, Chips Ahoy and most Oscar Mayer Lunchables on programs aimed at children ages 6 to 11. Other companies followed, including Kellogg, which said last month that it would stop marketing foods that have more than 12 grams of sugar per serving to children. These include such childhood favorites as Froot Loops, Apple Jacks and Pop-Tarts.

Companies such as McDonalds, Campbell Soup, Coca Cola and PepsiCo have all agree'd to stop advertising products to children that don't meet certain nutritional standards. This means any products they have which contain more than 12g of sugar per serving have to either be reformulated to meet those requirements or alternatively, stop advertising the product to under 12's completely. 

However, there is still a huge loophole in these changes. Although the companies have agree'd to stop advertising nutritionally deficient products to under 12's, that doesn't stop them from advertising the same products on family shows. The article points out that family shows such as American Idol have a lot more under 12's watching than a show like Spongebob Square Pants and so they are still being targeted.

The article questions whether the companies are really making changes for the benefit of the children or whether it's just to cover their own backs with an upcoming investigation on childhood obesity. They don't want to be labelled as a contributor and so they are making small changes that on paper, make them appear much better. 

Although at first, it seems that the companies are being a massive help, when you look into it further, they aren't all they seem. One of the examples in the article states how a chewing gum brand plans to promote healthier eating habits, but when questioned what they would be, it is just eating smaller portions of their gum. 

Some companies are, however, making useful changes which really could make a difference such as PepsiCo getting rid of their character Cap'n Crunch from all television, print and internet advertisements.