ARTICLE
14 August 2018

Placement Of "Unhealthy" Food Advertisements Come Under Heavy Scrutiny

HL
HGF Ltd
Contributor
HGF is one of Europe's largest firms of intellectual property specialists in Europe, with 21 offices across the UK, The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Ireland. The firm's trade mark attorneys, patent attorneys and IP solicitors provide an integrated IP solution for clients.
Several ASA decisions published today highlight the continued focus by the ASA on advertising high fat, sugar or salt products ("HFSS") to children.
UK Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Several ASA decisions published today highlight the continued focus by the ASA on advertising high fat, sugar or salt products ("HFSS") to children.

Advertising HFSS products is under heavy scrutiny with even London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, investigating a ban on such advertising in London to help tackle obesity.

KFC advertised its Krushems product on a phone box by a school. The CAP Code requires that HFSS products must not be directed at children through the selection of media or the context in which they appeared. Importantly, no advertising medium should be used to advertise a HFSS product if more than 25% of its audience were under the age of 16.

The ASA did find that this advert breached the CAP Code. Whilst the ASA does recognise that outdoor advertising will not generally breach the CAP Code as children under 16 do not amount to over 25% of the population this advert was too close to a school and therefore its audience would be mainly children.

Kellogg's also fell foul of a ASA decision in relation to its advert above which was shown during the children's programme "Mr Bean". Interestingly, the ASA readily acknowledged that the product itself was not a HFSS product. However, it was held that as the use of the Coco Pops brand and use of Coco the Monkey was prominent children would associate the advert with the brand Coco Pops rather than the specific granola product. The entire Coco Pops range contained HFSS products and therefore the advert breached the CAP Code.

In contrast McDonalds successfully defended two ASA complaints. The first involved advertising HFSS products on bus tickets which were aimed at the general population and therefore not aimed at an audience under the age of 16. The second advert was for its Happy Meals and aimed at children. The ASA reviewed the entire Happy Meal range and found that it was overall a non-HFSS product.

Placement of advertisements is no longer a simple issue. Obesity is high on the political agenda and complaints about HFSS products are now much more frequent. It is important to consider not only where the product will be advertised but also whether the product and its supporting product range is HFSS.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

ARTICLE
14 August 2018

Placement Of "Unhealthy" Food Advertisements Come Under Heavy Scrutiny

UK Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Contributor
HGF is one of Europe's largest firms of intellectual property specialists in Europe, with 21 offices across the UK, The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Ireland. The firm's trade mark attorneys, patent attorneys and IP solicitors provide an integrated IP solution for clients.
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More