Codes. Our members regard these Codes as very important to their businesses and treat compliance with them as the right and responsible thing to do.” That sentiment is echoed by Heart Foundation food and nutrition manager Dave Munro, although he believes the new measures still do not go far enough and more proposals need to be adopted to effectively reduce the advertising of unhealthy food and drinks to children. “Any country that is serious about addressing childhood obesity, especially to the level we have here in New Zealand, needs to place advertising to children at the top of its agenda,” he says. The Heart Foundation was hoping the United Nation’s definition of a child as being under 18 would be adopted. “We are disappointed to see the new code still allowing unhealthy food brands to be advertised in high schools and carried on sports gear. All environments where children gather should be free from the marketing of unhealthy products,” says Munro. Calls to adopt stricter World Health Organisation criteria have come from several sources here, including the University of Auckland where a recent study of 13,066 packaged foods found most of the 36% of foods considered healthy by New Zealand’s Health Star Rating did not qualify as permitted by WHO. Professor Cliona Ni Mhurchu says “Given the recognised weak nutritional standards employed by industry for defining healthy foods and because many child-oriented food marketers do not participate in self-regulation, the new children’s code ... should be subject to evaluation by an independent body. If the revised voluntary code still proves ineffective in reducing New Zealand children’s exposure to the marketing of unhealthy foods and drinks, additional policy and regulatory actions will be necessary.” Ni Mhurchu says the major food category differences between the three systems - in breakfast cereals, fruit bars, fruit/vegetable juices and dried fruit - “appear to be due mainly to the different weighting that each system gives to sugar, with HSR in particular and FBCS to a lesser extent notably more lenient in classifying more high sugar products as eligible/permitted.” Critics of the proposed new code are scathing. Public health specialist and Otago University at Wellington professor Nick Wilson says a voluntary code is the easy way to waste time in introducing actual regulation, in the way the tobacco industry has done for two decades. The review, he says, is “ridiculous” for failing to adopt a classification system such as the World Health Organisation’s European system or at least the star rating system. Association of New Zealand Advertisers chief executive Lindsay Mouat says that if the proposed code is adopted, this country’s standards for advertising to children will be “among the most stringent in the world.” The association says it is disappointed that the review panel has stuck with defining children as being less than 14 years old. “There is clear evidence that young people, 12 and over, are able to recognise and decipher commercial messages for what they are,” Mouat says. Minister Coleman believes the food and beverage industries are committed to finding solutions to childhood obesity through an industry-wide pledge. Some have also made specific pledges to change their recipes, advertising and labels. “I welcome the pledges which have been developed by the Ministry of Health and the sector. Industry will report back on their progress in a year’s time.” NEW KIWI FINDINGS: A study by three Otago University researchers has revealed that junk food advertisements on television are more likely watched by poorer children and recommends that ads should not target anyone under the age of 18. The research - which looked at food advertising on TV2, TV3, Cartoon Network and Nickelodean over four days and during times that children usually watch television – found there are major problems with current television ad regulations. Poorer children watch more free channels than paid television channels, and therefore are exposed to more junk food advertising, the researchers believe. Some food companies submitted to the ASA’s Code for Advertising to Children’s panel that the age for advertising should be lowered to 12, as children of that age understand the purpose of advertising and can analyse it critically. The study found: • Peak viewing times for children are weekdays from 7am to 9am, and 3pm to 9pm • The ASA defines children as anyone under 14, but the United Nations defines children as under 18 • TV2 and TV3 had by far the most food advertisements…138 and 93 respectively • Of those ads, 55% on TV2 were for unhealthy food, and 73% on TV3 • Cartoon Network and Nickelodean had 18 food ads each, none of which were for unhealthy food. The study recommends that: • The definition of ‘peak hours’ for children’s television viewing be changed to reflect the viewing statistics • The definition of a ‘child’ be changed to anyone under 18 • An independent organisation regularly monitor food advertising on television. WHAT THE ADVERTISERS LIKE: • It will reflect good international practice • It will lessen the potential risk of children viewing harmful or inappropriate material • It consolidates two current codes into one, which will be easier for the public and advertisers to understand. WHAT THEY DON’T LIKE: • Defining children as under 14. “Young people, 12 and over, are able to decipher commercial messages for what they are.” • It will make New Zealand one of the world’s most regulated advertising landscapes. What the Heart Foundation likes: • Increased sponsorship restrictions • Ability to effectively monitor and evaluate changes. What the Heart Foundation doesn’t like: • Unhealthy food brands still able to be advertised in high schools and carried on sports gear • High profile sportspeople, teams and events still able to be sponsored by brands associated with unhealthy food and drink • United Nations’ definition of a child as being under 18 not adopted. www.foodtechnology.co.nz 19
FT-Nov16
To see the actual publication please follow the link above