ANA Marketing Musings

A Round of Applause? Food For Thought

This past week, ten of the largest companies in the food and beverage industry in conjunction with the industry’s self regulatory body, the National Advertising Review Council (NARC), came together to announce a historic set of children’s advertising and marketing guidelines. The purpose of this collaboration was to find a way for the food industry to contribute to the fight against childhood obesity.

Over the past few years, public policy groups such as the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) pleaded for a comprehensive effort to combat the growing epidemic of obesity in this country. In many of their reports, they recommended changes in food industry practices. Under no obligation to do so, the industry recognized that it needed to play an important, contributory role– and proceeded to embrace that role with a wide range of positive actions such as:

• The introduction of 4,500 new and healthier products over the last three years by food and beverage companies and restaurant chains
• Significant changes to advertising, promotions and products available in schools by leading  beverage and snack food companies
• Support for a variety of public service campaigns led by The Advertising Council’s “Small Steps” effort and a recently announced program to combat obesity and promote healthy lifestyles.

Along the way, many companies began reassessing their respective marketing practices and decided to pursue a markedly different path– consistent with the wishes of policymakers and public policy groups. Of note have been the efforts of Kraft, PepsiCo and General Mills.

Beyond these concrete actions, the industry is finding ways to do even more – as exemplified by the joint announcement of NARC and the ten companies under the program called the “Children’s Food and Beverage Initiative.”  No matter how you slice it, these companies are committing to devote more than 50% of their children’s advertising to messages that communicate healthy food / beverage choices and/or healthy lifestyles. Additionally, these companies are committing to eliminate advertising from schools and to reduce practices such as product placement and third party licensing.

These are real, substantive measures that represent a materially different strategic direction than anyone in the industry would have believed possible just three years ago. Moreover, they are not easy to undertake, as anyone who has managed a business with volume, revenue and profit responsibilities can attest.

Yet, what’s been the reaction from organizations like Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI)?  They’ve been publicly dismissive – even rude, calling this effort “pathetic” – greatly undermining their own credibility in my opinion.

Reasonable people – important policymakers – are correctly acknowledging that the industry’s actions represent real, tangible change.

• J. Michael McGinnis, who served as chair of the Institute of Medicine’s Food Marketing Committee, called the Children’s Food and Beverage Initiative “a move in the right direction….”
• FTC Chairwoman Deborah Majoras said the Initiative “shows real promise …. “
• Senator Tom Harkin noted that the Initiative “shows the industry is headed in the right direction.”
• Senator Sam Brownback stated “I appreciate this new initiative and consider it a step in the right direction.”

Are we done yet? Of course not. There is always more to do.  And the Board of NARC and the Council of Better Business Bureaus have indicated they will continue to review the self regulatory process and push for even greater change where necessary.

But let’s take a step back every now and then, and give the food marketing industry a pat on the back for doing something really good.  We know we didn’t completely save the world this week, but we should feel proud that we heeded the call of consumers and responsible policymakers: We moved the needle decidedly in a positive direction. So I, for one, am going to stand up and give us all a much-deserved round of applause. I hope others will follow.

ANA Applauds Self-Regulation Actions of CBBB and NARC

The ANA applauds as major steps forward the announcement by the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB) and the National Advertising Review Council (NARC) of two significant actions in the self-regulation of advertising to children.

CBBB and NARC announced a comprehensive revision of the Self-Regulatory Guidelines for Children’s Advertising (Guidelines), strengthening the ability of the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU) to provide direction to all industry sectors. In addition, under the auspices of CBBB and NARC, ten leading food and beverage advertisers established the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (Initiative), designed to encourage healthy dietary choices and lifestyles by shifting the mix of advertising messages to children.

We believe that with these bold steps, marketers are augmenting their commitment to strong industry self-regulation with a new pledge of ‘public interest self-motivation.  Proactively identifying socially responsible ways of serving the public, food and beverage marketers are committing to devote large portions of their annual budgets to promoting positive social change.

In heralding the revisions to the Guidelines and the boldness of the Initiative, I want to also note other major efforts by the marketing community to respond to growing concerns about obesity in America.  For example, the Advertising Council, the industry’s public service arm, is encouraging children to make better food choices and be physically more active via a campaign launched a year ago entitled "Can Your Food Do That?” In addition, over the past three years, food marketers have introduced and promoted 4,500 new and improved low fat/low calorie offerings to the marketplace.

It is especially pleasing to see important policymakers like Sen. Tom Harkin and Federal Trade Commission Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras supporting the steps being taken by the marketing industry.  Chairman Majoras said the new initiative “shows real promise, and I hope will encourage more competition in developing and marketing healthier products that are attractive to kids and their parents.”  Senator Harkin said, “These steps show that the industry is headed in the right direction in the ongoing battle to combat childhood obesity and surging rates of diabetes in children.”  Both Chairman Majoras and Senator Harkin noted that effective enforcement of the announced actions was essential to achieve meaningful results.

Clearly there is more work to be done.  We want to see expanded participation in the Initiative to include the entire food and beverage industry, with the goal of reducing obesity in America.

Harkin Hears a Mouthful from Advertisers

I am extremely disappointed by the recurrent charges and finger-pointing of Senator Harkin regarding food advertising and marketing to children. Yesterday, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) spoke at the annual joint AAF/AAAA/ANA Government Affairs Conference commenting on the advertising industry and his opinions on the affect that he believes it is having on the child obesity issue in the

U.S.  Senator Harkin's comments are listed  here (PDF).

The ANA, AAAA and AAF presented Senator Harkin with this letter (PDF) at the conference yesterday, in response to a letter he sent in March which included many of the same criticisms of the ad industry included in his speech.   

The Most Socially Responsible Industry in America -- Advertising

The cornerstone principle that underscores all marketing is commercial free speech. When commercial messages for legal products are truthful and non-deceptive, marketers should be completely free to market their products and services unencumbered by government regulation – or the threat of such regulation.

I raise this point – at this particular moment in time – because of the outrageous attempts by Congress to vilify advertisers and marketers for many ills in American society. As noted by my colleague Dan Jaffe in his blog, Senators Harkin and Clinton bashed food marketers for undermining the health of our children by causing obesity. Representative Moran called for the restriction of ED ads. And Senator Grassley outlined provisions to eliminate the tax deductibility of prescription drug advertising.

I have no problems with politicians calling upon various industries to support initiatives that seek to improve the social well-being of all Americans. But I do have big problems when those calls threaten to impose governmental regulation and control -- particularly when the underlying issues are poorly supported by the facts.

I am particularly frustrated when the good work and socially responsible initiatives of our marketing industry go unrecognized and unappreciated – particularly by those grand standing in the political arena.

* Think of the great work done by the Advertising Council and its media partners who provide more than $1.5 Billion in donated media to educate the public on a variety of issues including drunk driving, seat belt usage and, of course, the well-being of children.

* Think of all of the great work done by the Partnership for Drug Free America and the enormous success it has had in curbing drug usage – particularly among teens and young adults.

* Think of all of the great work done by the Children’s Advertising Review Unit and the National Advertising Division of NARC – our self regulatory body -- to ensure truthful and non-deceptive advertising.

* Think of all of the great work done by the Family Friendly Programming Forum – the advertiser-sponsored group associated with the ANA that has successfully delivered outstanding prime time network programs so that parents and kids can watch television together.

* Think of all the great work done by the AAF, the 4A’s and the AEF to promote improved advertising and marketing education at our country’s higher institutions.

The marketing industry has done more than its share to contribute to the well being of people in America. Our industry’s social responsibility track record is second to none – and I encourage any and all politicians to take a fair and balanced look at the incredible good that we do.

All of us – the media, the agencies and our marketers -- should be very proud of the indelible contributions we have made -- and will continue to make – to American Society.

America = Free Speech - Whether We Like It or Not

Free speech is the most important and fundamental right we have as Americans. It is the foundation for the free exchange of ideas and ideals that drives the lifestyles and livelihoods in this most free of countries. Free speech is the basis of choice and personal responsibility. Without the free exchange of information, we limit the ability of Americans to be fully informed to make the choices that are inherently theirs to make. When those freedoms are jeopardized, we all lose. When you begin to chip away, even marginally, at those freedoms, we all run the risk of sliding down that slippery slope of diminishing rights and privileges. That is why I felt most compelled to address the recent release of the “Guidelines for Responsible Food Marketing to Children” (PDF) by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI).

I am rather stunned that CSPI – or any organization for that matter -- would suggest restricting or modifying the free speech of perfectly legal enterprises as an approach to solve a problem. We all recognize that there are a host of societal issues – childhood and adult obesity stands out as one of the most “curable” of them all. But seeking a cure should not follow the path of trampling on our core rights and privileges of Americans. Without question or argument, there are a range of reasonable alternatives and approaches that can be considered and aggressively pursued --- and they should with full vigor. But trampling on the First Amendment whether through government controls or unsupported self-regulatory edicts should not even be on anyone’s radar screen – as a way to solve problems.  Accordingly, I have addressed CSPI’s “guidelines” in today’s Ad Age editorial (Full text follows below).

---

Last week the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) did something that was neither based on science nor beneficial to the public interest.  They released a set of ill-conceived, heavy-handed food marketing guidelines.  Based on flawed data and backed by the threat of lawsuits, they intend to coerce the food and marketing industries to conform to their misguided views of what constitutes good nutrition and what represents appropriate commercial communication with consumers.

In issuing these guidelines, CSPI misstates the facts about food advertising and childhood TV viewing; they overlook the broad array of factors – beyond marketing – that influence childhood food consumption; they disregard the significant efforts of food companies to enhance the nutritional content of their products; and they ignore the fact that food and other advertising are already among the most stringently regulated areas in the United States.

Styling themselves as the nation’s food nanny, CSPI has proposed a set of extraordinarily overreaching regulations, which specify acceptable nutritional content, portion size, packaging design and logo use.  They further seek to control communications in TV shows, video games, web sites and books.  And they attempt to dictate use of premiums, incentives, licensing arrangements, cross promotions, sponsorships and even the aisles within supermarkets where food products are displayed!

The guideline specifics are ridiculously restrictive.  For example, children are defined as “anyone under 18;” low-nutrition beverages are defined as “drinks with less than 50 percent real juice;” and banned TV shows are those “for which more than a quarter of the audience is children.”  They are an affront to – and broadside attack on – the marketing freedoms of food and restaurant businesses, broadcasters, entertainment companies and the entire marketing industry.

We won’t be intimidated!  Nor will American consumers who – unlike CSPI – recognize the importance of personal and parental responsibility, public education, dietary balance and moderation and, of course, physical activity in addressing the issues of childhood nutrition and obesity.

So let me specifically address the major flaws inherent in CSPI’s guidelines.

First, CSPI speciously claims that the amount of marketing aimed at kids has doubled in the last ten years.  In examining measured media, however, a detailed study by Nielsen Media Research covering the period of 1993 to 2003 concludes otherwise.  Adjusting for inflation in order to hold the value of dollars constant, real expenditures on food and restaurant advertising on television (including cable) fell over this ten-year period.  Furthermore, the actual number of food ads seen by children under 12 declined by 13 percent from the first four years of this period to the last four years.  Rather than being increasingly bombarded by restaurant and food advertising, as CSPI would have people believe, kids 12 and under are actually seeing fewer food and restaurant ads today.

Second, CSPI’s report states that “parents bear the primary responsibility for feeding their children.”  However, the guidelines then ignore this point and the fact that adults make the vast majority of food purchases for their families, particularly for younger kids.  They also disregard what the majority of food experts inherently know: that the best way to encourage good childhood nutrition is to promote healthy, well-balanced diets, rather than attempting to characterize some products as “good foods” and others as “bad foods.”  When other countries have attempted to ban or severely restrict children’s advertising, those efforts have consistently failed to lower obesity rates in comparison to countries where there are no such restrictions.

Finally, let’s take a look at the significant, positive steps the food and marketing industries are taking – and have historically taken – to address the special concerns of children.  Thirty years ago, the marketing industry established the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU) specifically to recognize that material which might be truthful and non-deceptive for adults could still mislead young people.  CARU created a detailed code, available at www.caru.org/guidelines, which proactively works to assure that children are not taken advantage of in the advertising marketplace.  CARU diligently carries out its own monitoring and receives complaints from regulators, consumer advocates, Attorneys General, competitors and the public at large.  The record of industry compliance with CARU’s guidelines demonstrates an extremely high level of effectiveness.

Equally important are the many, significant steps that food and restaurant companies are taking to bring healthy new offerings to market.  For example, they are reformulating products to be lower in cholesterol, fat and calories.  They are removing trans fats, reducing sodium and sugar content, introducing whole grains and offering more milk products and salad menu items.

There is no question that childhood nutrition and obesity are serious societal issues.  However, as the Surgeon General concluded in his groundbreaking 2001 report, “There is no simple or quick answer to this multifaceted challenge.”  Unlike CSPI’s guidelines which mislead the public by narrowly focusing on food advertising, the Surgeon General’s report contains thoughtful, specific recommendations on how to address the challenge in a balanced, comprehensive way.  It further calls on all of us – companies, individuals, families, schools, governments and the media – to work together in ways that will bring better health to everyone in this country.  We accept this challenge and stand ready to collaborate with all other interested, responsible parties to identify solutions that will truly work.

NARC Documents How Self-Regulation is Working

Today the National Advertising Review Council (NARC) published a white paper that clearly documents the advertising industry's ongoing self-regulatory efforts. The paper highlights all the major decisions that have been made in the food advertising category and provides a historical overview with representative examples from over 900 cases and inquiries on food and nutrition advertising. It also includes a section on current developments that synthesizes the Children's Advertising Review Unit's principles, guidelines and decisions related to food advertising to children.

The ANA applauds this effort and everyone associated with it. It is truly superb. It brings so many elements of the self regulatory process together in a most cohesive, comprehensive and comprehendible manner. I am quite impressed -- and I continued to learn about this marvelous self-regulatory system. It certainly elevates my pride about our system of social responsibility and industry responsibility. It also elevates my respect for our predecessors who had the foresight and will to create what we currently enjoy today.

The NARC paper demonstrates that our industry is hard at work - through self regulation - at addressing major societal concerns such as obesity. This effort is backed up by strong FTC regulation. We reiterate our longstanding position that there is absolutely no need for new restriction on advertising to children. I urge all members of Congress and the entire industry to carefully read the NARC white paper and consider the following reasons why a ban wouldn't solve the obesity issue. All of these are further documented in my recent Congressional testimony (PDF).

1. Ad bans don't work, as demonstrated in other countries
2. Ad bans could lead to declines in children's programming -- there's no scientific evidence this works
3. Ad bans are prohibited by the First Amendment
4. Obesity is a societal problem -- it's best left to parents to regulate for their children.
5. Responsible advertisers are guided by CARU
6. The ad industry is reacting - the Ad Council/Health and Human Services have produced an obesity control campaign
7. The food and restaurant industry is reacting by making changes to menus

Taking Steps to Address Childhood Obesity

The Ad Council and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services this week launched a new public service campaign targeting obesity. You can view the campaign here. This is something the ANA foreshadowed when I testified at a Senate subcommittee meeting on this issue last month. The advertising industry has long been self-regulated. If a problem arises, we fix it. We have mechanisms in place such as the Children’s Advertising Review Unit that are an active cop on the beat. The Ad Council/HHS campaign demonstrates that our industry is and will continue to play a role addressing the issue of obesity in America.