On Dec. 6, 2005, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies released a report titled “Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity.” The study was requested by Congress, sponsored by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and undertaken by the Committee on Food Marketing and the Diets of Children and Youth. After reviewing the scientific evidence on the influence of food marketing on the diets and dietrelated health of children and youth, the report concludes that “the prevailing pattern of food and beverage marketing to children and youth in America represents, at best, a missed opportunity, and at worst, a direct threat to the health prospects of the next generation.”
The health of this generation already appears to be at risk. According to IOM, obesity in 6- to 19-year-olds has more than tripled in the past four decades, from 5% in the 1960s to 16% in 1999 to 2002. That translates to some 9 million obese children and youths in the United States. In addition, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes has more than doubled in the past decade. Higher than recommended intakes of calories, sugars, sodium, total fat and saturated fats are to blame, according to the study. At the same time, intakes of whole grains, fiber, calcium, potassium, fiber, magnesium and vitamin E are well below recommendations.
Marketing campaigns targeted to youth are not solely responsible for this grim reality, the study acknowledges. Genetics and biology, culture and values, economics, and physical and social environments also help shape the dietary patterns of children and youth. However, the report states: “Among the various environmental influences, none has more rapidly assumed central socializing roles for young people than the media, in its multiple forms. With its growth in variety and penetration has come a concomitant growth in the promotion of branded food and beverage products in the marketplace, and the influence ... on the diet and related health patterns of children.” The central claim of the study, then, is that if America’s youth are to develop healthy long-term eating habits, they need to reduce their intake of high-calorie, low-nutrient and sweetened foods, all of which make up a “high portion of the products marketed to them,” according to the study.
“It’s the ultimate perfect storm of challenges,” says Bill Goodwin, president and CEO of Goodwin, Media, PA, a youth-oriented marketing design firm. “Using characters on packaging works, and it has worked for decades, ever since Mickey Mouse appeared on a Post cereal box in 1930. And if you take away the characters, many retailers will not bring in a product that doesn’t have a recognizable offering that increases the likelihood of its success.” The truth is, according to Goodwin, parents choose the category of food— cereal, for example—and kids choose the brand.
“With advertising, particularly when it comes to kids, it’s push,” Goodwin says. “That’s where it gets difficult, because a child can’t watch program X without having X pushed on him. That’s where the marketing industry needs to take some responsibility.”
That said, Goodwin maintains that the IOM report doesn’t reflect the food-industry changes that have occurred over the last several years. “I wouldn’t for a moment attempt to minimize the importance and the value of what the report is all about,” Goodwin says. “But in the last three years, there have been 4,500 products that have come out that are aspiring to a better nutritional benefit—either improved or outright new. And many companies are addressing the issue head-on. There is a great deal of activity missing from the report.”
In Jan. 2005, for example, Kraft Foods Inc., Northfield, IL, began to phase out advertising products that did not meet specific “better-for-you” nutrition criteria in media viewed primarily by children aged 6 to 11. Further, a “Sensible Solution” flag on packaging alerts consumers to more-nutritious products. Goodwin predicts more industry leaders will follow suit.
“Ultimately, I don’t believe that the product and packaging are bad,” Goodwin says. “I have to want the product and accept responsibility for taking it off the shelf. I have the same challenges any consumer does, but I also have the same responsibility that any parent does. I’m the gatekeeper. I am solely responsible for what my children have access to. I’m also able to look at it from a professional level and see the dynamics of households and tell you that the whole concept of nag factor is largely a decades-old, generations-old concept, which has given way to a more inclusive family environment.”