Food Fables - the second sitting The truth behind how food companies target children MAKING THE HEALTHY CHOICE THE EASY CHOICE Which? wants to see the healthy choice become the easy choice for UK consumers. Consumers want clear, easy to understand information about what makes a healthy diet, and to be able to distinguish between healthier and less healthy products. They do not want to be conned into buying products that are misleadingly presented as healthy and they don't want to see pressure put on children to choose less healthy foods, making it so much harder for parents to encourage their children to eat well balanced diets. Our research shows that, despite supporting social responsibility, many companies are still putting their efforts into heavily promoting less healthy products whether its through cartoon characters aimed directly at children or the health claims and confusing labelling aimed at reassuring or bamboozling their parents. This isn't good enough. Which? wants to see responsible food companies using their creativity to help their customers to make healthy lifestyle choices. We're not against treats and we aren’t against marketing, but we are against irresponsible company practices and hollow company commitments. We’d love to see the need for regulation erased because all food companies had cleaned up their act. We want to see all food companies using their ingenuity and expertise to develop and market healthier options, supported and prompted by a government that acts on its committment to tackle obesity. WHY MARKETING LESS HEALTHY FOODS TO CHILDREN MUST STOP Diet and Obesity Crisis Poor Quality Choices Ads Influence Kids If current trends continue, it’s predicted The Food Standards Agency’s Four key reviews4 have all concluded that that 70 per cent of girls and 55 per cent National Diet and Nutrition Survey2 food advertising and promotion of boys will be overweight or obese by has highlighted that children eat too influences children’s food preferences 2050, and that obesity will cost the much fat, sugar and salt and not enough and food choices. economy over £45 billion.1 fruit and vegetables. Obesity is the consequence of energy imbalance – too Parents Want Change Which? research5 has shown many children are consuming more frustration by parents, and public calories than they use up with exercise. support for more action from Limiting foods high in fat and sugar, government and food companies. particularly those that are highly In February 2008, a Which? survey processed and contribute little found that 88 per cent of consumers nutritional value, is critical in helping to think food companies need to be redress this imbalance and to reduce the more responsible in the way they incidence of other diet-related disease. market food to children and that 84 per cent of consumers think the ‘Less healthy’ Ads Dominate government needs to do more to Which? research3 has highlighted the control the way less healthy foods are wide range of promotional techniques marketed to children.6 that are used to target fatty, sugary and salty foods at children and the scarcity of healthier promotions in comparison. 2 Food Fables-the second sitting SUMMARY Leading food companies in the UK are still not doing enough to curb their marketing of less healthy food to children. Since our Food Fables report in 2006, stricter TV advertising regulations have come into force but these are failing to stop children being exposed to less healthy food advertising. There have been improvements. Many companies have stopped targeting young children, and Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) and Weetabix stand out for taking a more responsible approach. But our review of food marketing practices in the first six months of 2008 found that while most of the leading food companies now have impressive sounding policies on marketing to children, they still leave plenty of scope for less healthy promotions. Many are still reliant on traditional marketing techniques such as competitions and cartoon characters on packaging. Others have shifted their focus to the teen market, using increasingly diverse and often underhand ways to promote less healthy products to children using new media such as websites and mobiles, in a way that parents are unlikely to be aware of. All of this is in spite of spiralling child obesity rates and diet-related health problems. Over 30 per cent of 2 to 15 year old boys and over 28 per cent of 2 to 15 year old girls are already obese or overweight and predictions suggest this will rise dramatically.7 Which? wants to see an end to the marketing of foods high in fat, sugar and/or salt to children as part of a broader strategy to tackle poor diets. Promoting food to children influences what they choose to eat and current promotions are dominated by sugary breakfast cereals, soft drinks, confectionery and savoury snacks. If we’re to help young people to eat more healthily, it’s vital that we reduce their exposure to the marketing of less healthy foods. A new Which? survey shows that the public wants change. 88 per cent of people think that food companies need to be more responsible in the way that they market food to children.8 OUR RESEARCH his report revisits the Which? Food Fables report company websites, packaging, advertising and other promotions. of November 2006.9 We have reviewed the From 31 March to 13 April 2008 we analysed TV viewing data10 marketing tactics some of the leading food companies to assess which foods were being advertised in different regions by use to target children with foods high in fat, sugar which companies when most children were watching the main and/or salt and how this has changed since commercial TV channels. Tour last report. We used the Food Standards Agency’s nutrient profiling scheme11 We have also looked at company marketing policies to see if they to assess the healthiness of products promoted by the companies. go far enough. We have drawn conclusions on the performance of Only products that were assessed to be ‘less healthy’ (ie. high in the food companies overall and made recommendations for the fat, sugar and/or salt) have been used as examples in this report. action that needs to be taken by industry and government. We Throughout the report, we define a child as someone under 16. have also highlighted specific areas that we think individual ‘Younger children’ are aged up to 11 and ‘older children’ are companies could be focusing on in the meantime in order to be 12 to 15. Company policies have been edited, but we have more responsible. From January to June 2008 we looked at included all key aspects relevant to marketing of food to children. Food Fables-the second sitting 3 WHERE ARE WE NOW? here has been a lot of debate PUSHY PROMOTIONS about food marketing controls since our first Food Fables The majority of non-broadcast promotions, report. But there is currently such as press and billboard ads, online very little regulation advertising and promotional offers, fall Tregarding the advertising and promotion under the self-regulatory control of the of food to children. While Ofcom, the Advertising Standards Authority. The 80% government communications regulator, content of this marketing is judged against 12 think TV ads for has introduced rules for TV ads, these are the CAP (Committee of Advertising too limited and other forms of marketing Practice)15 code, which is in most parts the unhealthy foods are largely controlled by patchy self same as the BCAP, except that it doesn’t regulation and company policies. even recognise that there are foods high in shouldn’t be allowed fat, sugar and salt, only differentiating fresh TV TIMINGS fruit and vegetables. Again specific when kids are restrictions only apply to pre and primary Since January 2008 advertising of ‘less school children and these are limited in watching in the healthy’ foods13 to children during scope (as with the BCAP, company cartoon programmes ‘of particular appeal to under characters are permitted for children of greatest numbers 16s’ has been restricted on terrestrial TV all ages). channels. Digital children’s channels will Company and branded websites are free have to implement the new rules by to run any content, such as games and 1 January 2009. The new rules are a promotions appealing to children, because positive first step, but they are ineffective in they are classified as editorial content. The limiting the advertising of less healthy UK advertisers’ body ISBA introduced a foods when most children are watching voluntary content code in 2007 but it is similar to the CAP code16, and therefore has TV.14 This is because the restrictions are determined not by the total number of children watching, but by the proportion. So if a programme is watched by 20 per cent more under 16s than the general viewing population, restrictions apply. On the other hand, even if a huge number of children are watching a show, if there’s also a large number of adults watching, restrictions don’t apply. A self-regulatory code (Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice – BCAP) restricts the actual content of TV adverts targeted at children. It was strengthened in 2007 but the effect has been limited, and it needs to go further. The Code contains some restrictions on promoting foods high in fat, sugar and/or salt such as the use of celebrities or licensed cartoon characters, but only for pre or primary school children. Companies’ own cartoon characters, such as Kellogg’s Tony the Tiger and Nestlé’s Quicky the Nesquik Bunny, are not restricted at all.