Are current laws on marketing advertisement on HSFF products in Ireland outdated?

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Ireland is grappling with a significant rise in obesity rates, which have doubled over the past two decades (Cliath, 2016). This brief examines the link between this alarming trend and the marketing of “High in Fat, Salt, and Sugar” (HFSS) products in the country. The current marketing regulations are outdated and insufficient, exacerbating the obesity problem. To address this issue, this brief proposes targeted policy recommendations and legal reforms aimed at curbing the promotion of HFSS products and mitigating their impact on public health. More precisely, this brief covers the following strategies: extending the television watershed for junk food advertisements to reduce children’s exposure, banning outdoor advertising of HFSS products on state-owned properties and public transport; and prohibiting HFSS advertising in areas frequented by individuals under 18 years old, such as schools and sports facilities. Additionally, the brief advocates for increasing resources dedicated to advertising campaigns that promote healthy options.

INTRODUCTION

According to Ireland’s Health Service Executive (HSE), nowadays 1 in 5 children experience obesity or overweight, while a considerably higher share of adults (60%) share this medical condition (Mitchell et al, 2020). Therefore, tackling obesity is a key policy priority in the country. On the one hand, the detrimental health effects are significant, as many life-threatening chronic diseases are associated with it, such as cancer or type 2 diabetes. On the other hand, the economic burden of this disease is high, with costs estimated to be around 4.5 billion euros in 2015 according to Safe Food (Perry et al, 2017). The current figure is likely to be significantly higher given that the percentage of obese people has increased in recent years.

This policy brief therefore seeks to analyse the current laws on marketing advertising on “High in Fat, Salt, and Sugar” (HFSS)  products in Ireland and explain why, for many Irish, they are outdated and, thus, not effective. The second part of the brief provides policy suggestions to further reduce the levels of obesity among kids and teenagers.

The focus on marketing is motivated by many studies indicating a connection between childhood obesity and advertisement (Bruce et al, 2016; Boyland et al, 2021). It was reported that the food choice by children and teenagers is the result of hedonic factors such as taste instead of other considerations, including health values. Thus, marketing on junk food poses a threat to their diet and their health by influencing food preferences and choices. Advertisement puts young people in a vulnerable position as they cannot recognise that they are exposed to publicity and persuasion techniques. Consequently, it is argued that, by limiting the amount of advertising on the HFSS products they see, the probability of this group becoming obese adults is reduced.

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 

The current Irish laws on HSFF products advertisement targeted at children were approved in 2013 and modified in 2021. These restrict junk food-related TV and radio advertising to under-18 up to 6pm. Similarly, such  advertisements are banned if more than 50% of its audience is under 15 years old (BAI, 2013). Additionally, marketing for HFSS food in locations primarily frequented by children is also prohibited (McCann FitzGerald, 2021). Nevertheless, while this policy tries to reduce the connection between advertising and obesity rates, it can be considered obsolete given the shifts in the habits of under-18s.  

First, it is argued that the 6pm restriction and the 50% audience requirement is not enough. There is wide support among the Irish population to push 9pm as the watershed on advertising of junk food, and overall, to ban junk food marketing to children all along. In 2017, the Irish Heart Foundation launched a petition called “Stop Targeting Kids” to show the government that the public supported a ban on junk food marketing to children. Additionally, it was reported that 80.2% of the Irish support the policy, with 32% of teenagers being in favour of banning the advertisement of HFSS products to those under 18 (Safe Food, 2022; Gittens, 2022). 

The reason behind this demand is that, currently, lots of TV programmes or series that children and especially teenagers watch are on air after 6pm, and thus, they do not face any restrictions on advertising. In fact, a research by Ofcom (2007) reports that children’s viewing peaks after school finishes, with most of them watching TV between 6pm to 9pm. This is the case with sport competitions, family-friendly programmes such as X Factor, or series like The Simpsons or Derry Girls. Consequently, regardless of the law, many young people are still exposed to unhealthy products ads. This was precisely the conclusion of the report by Tatlow-Golden et al (2016) in which they indicated that young children in Ireland still view over 1000 ads for HFSS products each year. This mirrors the findings reported in the UK, where advertisement for HFSS products increased by 230% during non-child programmes but with high levels of young viewers (Galbraith-Emami & Lobstein, 2013). Note that the UK findings are based on child viewers, which means that teenagers are likely to be exposed to significantly higher numbers of advertisements on junk food.  

As stated above, nowadays youngsters see most of junk food ads during TV programmes that are not labelled as “children’s shows” despite having a non-negligible under-18 audience. While said numbers are unlikely to reach 50% or more of the TV spectators—hence falling under the legal requirement to implement HSFF ads restrictions—, this does not entail that it is not significant.

POLICY OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

For the reasons exposed in the previous section, this policy brief encourages a modification of the law so that any TV programme that reaches a 20% of under-18 audience must face the ban on HFSS products advertisement. Currently, when teenagers are asked how often they see junk food advertisements, a significant amount report that they are still exposed to this sort of advertisement. This shows that current laws are not stringent enough, as they are specifically targeting child-directed TV programmes. In addition to this suggestion, another three policy recommendations are proposed in this section. 

1. Outdoor advertising in all state-owned buildings and transport. This is based on the success of the ban on advertisement of HFSS products London implemented across the entire Transport For London (TfL) network in 2019. Indeed, the average weekly calorie count from purchased HFSS products dropped by 1.001 kcal (6.7%). A more noticeable impact was seen in the reduction of calorie count from chocolate and confectionery, which fell by 317.9 kcal (19.4%) (Meiksin et al, 2022). According to another study by Breeze et al (2022), obesity cases decreased by 4.8 percentage points and cases of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases were reported to have fallen as well since 2019. Based on this outcome, this report contends that the same policy should be applied in Ireland. Note that this would not only target under-18 years old, but instead the whole population. Considering the worrying percentage of overweight Irish adults, they would experience significant benefits in terms of health from reduced exposure.

2. An expansion of the current ban that prevents HFSS advertisement in places frequented by children such as schools or parks. The current ban prevents said type of marketing in places frequently visited by children, but places that  teenagers frequent are not included. Thus, in 2022, 13% of Irish teenagers confessed seeing outdoor advertising of HFSS products (Gittens, 2022). Famous festivals in Ireland such as Longitude or Electric Picnic that allow the entrance to under-18 (under certain conditions) are sponsored by HFSS-products-selling brands. Consequently, current laws seem to be more protective when it comes to children but less strict for teenagers, which is argued to undermine the effect intended. During their adolescence, teenagers’ choices of food are still largely based on taste and price, rather than health-related considerations. And given that, in contrast to kids, their actions are not supervised by their parents, the exposure to HFSS products advertisement of this demographic segment could even be more detrimental than that of children. Thus, restricting advertisement on HFSS products in places visited by teenagers is also critical. 

3. Reverse the trend. Lastly, apart from increasing the restrictions to limit HFSS advertising exposure among children and teenagers, more resources towards advertising campaigns on healthy products should be allocated. Given the relationship between exposure to ads and kids choosing certain products, it follows that the lack of visibility to healthy products skews children’s and teenagers’ perception of what a diet is (Powell et al, 2007). It should not be the case that the only advertised diet on TV and other platforms is junk food. There is evidence that suggests that the use of child-friendly characters influences children’s food preferences and choices (Bradshaw et al, 2020). Therefore, it is argued that, while this marketing strategy must not be used to advertise HFSS, it could be implemented to advertise healthier alternatives. This idea is supported by 37% of Irish teenagers, who stated that making the packaging of healthy products more appealing would help reduce junk food consumption among them (Gittens, 2022). Additional measures might include enhancing the visual appeal of shelves displaying healthy foods, such as fruits and vegetables, and strategically placing HFSS products away from store entrances and checkouts to reduce impulse purchases.

A successful implementation of these policies would imply a reduced consumption of unhealthy products (quantifiable through sales data, surveys, or dietary intake studies) and ensure a reduction in obesity rates within the target group. This can be verified by comparing trends on obesity rates problems before and after the ban, with other determining factors such as socioeconomic status or physical activity levels being controlled. Moreover, fewer doctor visits for obesity-related health issues are expected, such as type 2 diabetes among under-18s, indicating a reduction in such economic expenditures. Lastly, a rise in healthy food consumption through the substitution effect can also be anticipated, given the impact of campaigns and reduction on the supply of these products by HFSS companies. 

On this note, the policy’s impact on teenagers is expected to be greater than that on children. While the 6pm threshold already affects kids, the 9pm threshold would have a greater influence on teenagers who usually watch TV in the 6-11pm interval. Furthermore, HFSS products advertisement on places frequented by children was already restricted, but this policy brief suggests extending it to locations visited by teenagers. 

These suggestions are not exempt from limitations, but it is argued that the benefits would still outweigh the shortcomings. First, although the consumption of social media is growing and therefore regulation is needed, addressing traditional channels of advertising is still important. This is because there is already age regulation in access to social media (most of them require children to be at least 13 years old). Moreover, even if the use of social media has increased, there is still a significant proportion of teenagers consuming linear TV channels and streaming services that are now including ads. 

Second, other tools such as fiscal policies could be proposed as an alternative. One could argue that, as long as junk food is cheap, advertisement may not play a significant role in influencing consumption. However, note that consumption taxes are regressive, disproportionately affecting  low-income households, while subsidies for healthier products can lead to budgetary pressure. Consequently, while these fiscal policies can effectively reduce obesity rates among children and teenagers, they may also have unintended economic consequences.

In contrast, restricting the advertisement of junk food and promoting healthier options can achieve the same goal without these economic downsides. By modifying young people’s food preferences through targeted advertising, healthier eating habits are encouraged without the need to change prices. Moreover, there are no difficulties in terms of implementation, as it simply expands the current one, and it already has the support of the population.

To ensure the success of these policies, continuous monitoring is essential. The HSE plays a critical role in this process by overseeing the implementation of these measures and producing annual reports on youth obesity. These reports should analyse trends in obesity rates in relation to the aggregate intake of HFSS products, providing valuable insights into the effectiveness of the policies and highlighting areas for further improvement.

CONCLUSION 

This policy brief proposed future guidelines to address under-18 obesity in Ireland. After evaluating the shortcomings of the current policy, additional restrictions on HFSS products on TV and outdoors were called for, as well as more campaigns promoting healthier products.

On the one hand, extending the television watershed for junk food advertisement, banning outdoor advertising on state-owned properties, and prohibiting HFSS promotions in areas frequented by children and teenagers was argued to ensure a reduction in the exposure of young people to unhealthy food marketing, leading to a decrease in obesity given the direct link. Other countries’ successes, including the UK, highlight how these policies could play a pivotal role in reversing the current obesity trend. On the other hand, investing in campaigns that promote healthy food was also proposed to actively encourage better dietary choices that contribute to a reduction in obesity levels. Additional measures in the form of enhancing the visual appeal of shelves displaying healthy foods, and positioning HFSS products away from store entrances and checkouts were also mentioned.

Although some factors that could limit the effectiveness of  these policies were acknowledged—like the increasing role of social media in promoting HFSS products and the slow shift in consumer habits without the support of fiscal policies—, the report argued for implementing more restrictions targeting traditional channels of communication to influence the food preferences and behaviour of children and teenagers. Lastly, to ensure the success of these policies, the involvement of national agencies such as the HSE was highlighted. More precisely, the paper emphasised its role in government-led monitoring of the kids and teenagers’ consumption patterns and dietary preferences, and ultimately, in the creation of annual reports that are vital for verifying the impact of the measures and guiding any necessary adjustments to improve their effectiveness.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Breeze, P., Thomas, C ., Cummins, S. (2022). The Health, Cost and Equity Impacts of Restrictions on the Advertisement of High fat, Salt and Sugar Products Across the Transport for London Network: a Health Economic Modelling Study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 19, 93. doi.org/10.1186/s12966-022-01331-y

Bradshaw, B., Crowther, B., Holt, A., Higham-Smith, C. (2020) Pester Power or Parent Power? Parent´s view or child-friendly characters on food and drink packaging. Food Active. Children´s Food Campaign. Sustain: the alliance for better food and farming. https://foodactive.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Cartoon-Characters-Report-July-2020.pdf

Bruce A.S., Pruitt S.W., Ha O.R., Cherry J.B.C., Smith T.R., Bruce J.M., Lim S.L. (2016) The Influence of Televised Food Commercials on Children’s Food Choices: Evidence from Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex Activations.  doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.06.067.

Boyland, E., Muc, M., Kelly, B., Halford, J.C.G., Vohra, J., Rosenberg, G., Christiansen, P. (2021). Indirect Associations Between Commercial Television Exposure and Child Body Mass Index. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2021 Jan;53(1):20-27. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2020.10.016. PMID: 33423753.

Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) (2013) Bai Issues Rules on Food Advertisement to Children. https://www.bai.ie/blog/2013/06/04/bai-issues-rules-on-food-advertising-to-children/

Cliath, B. (2016) A Healthy Weight  for Ireland. Obesity Policy and Action Plan 2016-2025. Heatlhy Ireland https://assets.gov.ie/10073/ccbd6325268b48da80b8a9e5421a9eae.pdf

Galbraith-Emami, S., & Lobstein, T. (2013). The impact of initiatives to limit the advertising of food and beverage products to children: A systematic review. Obesity Reviews, 2013, 1-15.   DOI: 10.1111/obr.12060

Gittens, G (2022, Nov 17) Many Teenagers Support ad bans and Better Information to Tackle Junk Food Marketing Blitz. The Irish Times. https://www.irishtimes.com/health/2022/11/17/many-teenagers-support-ad-bans-and-better-information-to-tackle-junk-food-marketing-blitz/

L.M Powell, G., Szczypka, F.J., Chaloupka, C.L. Braunshweig (2007) Nutritional content of television food advertising seen by children and adolescents in the United States. Pediatrics, 120 (3) (2007) DOI: 10.1542/peds.2006-3595

Mitchell, L., Bel-Serrat, S., Stanley, I., Hegarty, T., McCann, L., Mehegan, J., Murrin, C., Heinen, M., Kelleher, C. (2020). The Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative (COSI) in the Republic of Ireland – Findings from 2018 and 2019 https://www.hse.ie/eng/about/who/healthwellbeing/our-priority-programmes/heal/childhood-obesity-surveillance-initiativecosi/childhood-obesity-surveillance-initiative-report-2020.pdf

McCann FitzGerald, (2021) New ASAI Rules on Advertising of HFSS Products. https://www.mccannfitzgerald.com/knowledge/technology-and-innovation/new-asai-rules-on-advertising-of-hfss-products

Meiksin, R., Er, V., Thompson, C., Adams, J., Boyland, E., Burgoine, T., Cornelsen, L., de Vocht, F., Egan, M., Lake, A. A., Lock, K., Mytton, O., White, M., & Yau, A. (2022). Restricting the advertising of high fat, salt and sugar foods on the Transport for London estate: Process and implementation study. Social Science and Medicine. Volume 292, January 2022, 114548 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114548

Ofcom (2017). Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes report.https://www.ofcom.org.uk/media-use-and-attitudes/media-habits-children/children-and-parents-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2022/

Perry, I., Millar, S., Balanda, K., Dee, A.,Bergin, D., Carter, L., Doherty, E., Fahy, L., Hamilton, D., Jaccard, A., Knuchel-Takano, A., McCarthy, L., McCune, A., O´Malley, G., Pimpin, L., Queally, M.,  Webbe, L. (2017) What are the estimated costs of Childhood overweight and obesity on the island of Ireland? Safe food.  https://www.safefood.net/getmedia/07c9ceb0-dd71-4658-b679-cfc40c03e16b/Cost-of-childhood-obesity-Report.aspx?ext=.pdf

Safe Food (2022) Public Acceptability of Policies to Adress Obesity. Report https://www.safefood.net/getattachment/190a4b59-1b27-4fba-a445-8fb962d76fb5/Public-acceptability-of-policies-to-address-obesity_-Final.pdf?lang=en-IE

Tatlow-Golden, M., Murrin, C., Bergin, R., Kerr, M., O’Brien, S., Livingstone, B. (2015). Creating good feelings about unhealthy food: children’s televised ‘advertised diet’ on the island of Ireland, in a climate of regulation. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 36(1-4) pp. 83–100 doi.org/10.1080/03033910.2016.1194770