Alcohol Advertising in Pacific Islands Countries and Territories: A Scoping Review

Introduction: Alcohol has become embedded into the cultural, economic, and social fabric of Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICT); however, it continues to be a neglected health issue for many PICT. This scoping literature review explores current alcohol advertising policies in each PICT. Methods: This review utilises the 'Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses for Scoping reviews' to identify literature on alcohol advertising policies. Twenty-five sources, ranging from 1963 to 2020, form the final data synthesis. Findings: The results of this review reveal that not all PICT have alcohol advertising restrictions in place. Health warning labels as a means of deterring alcohol use are also inconsistent across PICT but aid in consumer decisions. A notable concern in alcohol advertising is the use of culture as a marketing ploy. Conclusion: This review provides essential information on alcohol advertising in PICT. Nine PICT enforce some form of alcohol advertising prohibition, and ten do not. In countries with alcohol advertising, drinking behaviours vary, demonstrating a need for further research on the implementation efforts of current policies. In countries with no alcohol advertising, alcohol use is normalised and portrayed as unproblematic. The use of health warning labels is also not consistent amongst PICT. The use of culture as a marketing ploy is unacceptable as it belittles culture and is disrespectful to leaders. Understanding the alcohol advertising restrictions that work in each PICT can help decrease alcohol consumption and the harms associated with its misuse across all PICT. Keywords: Alcohol, Advertising, Pacific.

Battling the bulge: Is a ban on children's food and beverage advertising consistent with freedom of expression?

<p>Obesity is increasingly recognised by policymakers as a threat to public health and wellbeing. Despite obesity’s many causes, one commonly cited concern of public health advocates is the prevalence of food and beverage advertising. In particular, concerns have focused upon the targeting of unhealthy food and beverage advertising towards children. The current evidence reveals children’s vulnerability to product advertising and its consequential effects upon children’s food-related attitudes and behaviours. Though the evidence of a link between food advertising and obesity is equivocal, it is sufficient to make the case for a ban on the advertising of unhealthy food and beverages to children. However, any advertising restrictions upon commercial advertising must be consistent with the right to free expression under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. An analysis of the theoretical justifications underlying free speech protections suggests greater leeway should be afforded legislators to regulate in the face of a public health crisis. In spite of the New Zealand Government’s willingness to rely upon a self-regulatory framework for advertising regulation, the success of statutory advertising restrictions internationally illustrates the potential for a stronger approach. Though a lack of evidence precludes an objective assessment of the efficacy of the current self-regulatory scheme, the theoretical incompatibility of self-regulation with the achievement of public health goals underscores the need for government-led regulation. Ultimately, the growing threat posed by the obesity epidemic, the absence of reasonable alternatives to statutory restrictions and the narrow scope of a ban on the advertising of unhealthy food and beverages to children mean the suggested ban represents a demonstrably justified limit upon free expression.</p>

Battling the bulge: Is a ban on children's food and beverage advertising consistent with freedom of expression?

<p>Obesity is increasingly recognised by policymakers as a threat to public health and wellbeing. Despite obesity’s many causes, one commonly cited concern of public health advocates is the prevalence of food and beverage advertising. In particular, concerns have focused upon the targeting of unhealthy food and beverage advertising towards children. The current evidence reveals children’s vulnerability to product advertising and its consequential effects upon children’s food-related attitudes and behaviours. Though the evidence of a link between food advertising and obesity is equivocal, it is sufficient to make the case for a ban on the advertising of unhealthy food and beverages to children. However, any advertising restrictions upon commercial advertising must be consistent with the right to free expression under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. An analysis of the theoretical justifications underlying free speech protections suggests greater leeway should be afforded legislators to regulate in the face of a public health crisis. In spite of the New Zealand Government’s willingness to rely upon a self-regulatory framework for advertising regulation, the success of statutory advertising restrictions internationally illustrates the potential for a stronger approach. Though a lack of evidence precludes an objective assessment of the efficacy of the current self-regulatory scheme, the theoretical incompatibility of self-regulation with the achievement of public health goals underscores the need for government-led regulation. Ultimately, the growing threat posed by the obesity epidemic, the absence of reasonable alternatives to statutory restrictions and the narrow scope of a ban on the advertising of unhealthy food and beverages to children mean the suggested ban represents a demonstrably justified limit upon free expression.</p>

Corporate political activity in the context of unhealthy food advertising restrictions across Transport for London: A qualitative case study

Background Diets with high proportions of foods high in fat, sugar, and/or salt (HFSS) contribute to malnutrition and rising rates of childhood obesity, with effects throughout the life course. Given compelling evidence on the detrimental impact HFSS advertising has on children’s diets, the World Health Organization unequivocally supports the adoption of restrictions on HFSS marketing and advertising. In February 2019, the Greater London Authority introduced novel restrictions on HFSS advertising across Transport for London (TfL), one of the most valuable out-of-home advertising estates. In this study, we examined whether and how commercial actors attempted to influence the development of these advertising restrictions. Methods and findings Using requests under the Freedom of Information Act, we obtained industry responses to the London Food Strategy consultation, correspondence between officials and key industry actors, and information on meetings. We used an existing model of corporate political activity, the Policy Dystopia Model, to systematically analyse arguments and activities used to counter the policy. The majority of food and advertising industry consultation respondents opposed the proposed advertising restrictions, many promoting voluntary approaches instead. Industry actors who supported the policy were predominantly smaller businesses. To oppose the policy, industry respondents deployed a range of strategies. They exaggerated potential costs and underplayed potential benefits of the policy, for instance, warning of negative economic consequences and questioning the evidence underlying the proposal. Despite challenging the evidence for the policy, they offered little evidence in support of their own claims. Commercial actors had significant access to the policy process and officials through the consultation and numerous meetings, yet attempted to increase access, for example, in applying to join the London Child Obesity Taskforce and inviting its members to events. They also employed coalition management, engaging directly and through business associations to amplify their arguments. Some advertising industry actors also raised the potential of legal challenges. The key limitation of this study is that our data focused on industry–policymaker interactions; thus, our findings are unable to present a comprehensive picture of political activity. Conclusions In this study, we identified substantial opposition from food and advertising industry actors to the TfL advertising restrictions. We mapped arguments and activities used to oppose the policy, which might help other public authorities anticipate industry efforts to prevent similar restrictions in HFSS advertising. Given the potential consequences of commercial influence in these kinds of policy spaces, public bodies should consider how they engage with industry actors.

Prevalence and Correlates of US Adult Public Opinion on Restricting Junk Food Advertising to Children on Social Media: 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey

Objective: To describe US adults’ levels of support, neutrality, and opposition to restricting junk food advertising to children on social media and explore associations with sociodemographic and health-related characteristics. Design: In 2020-2021, we used cross-sectional data from the National Cancer Institute’s 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey to estimate the prevalence of opinions toward advertising restrictions, and correlates of neutrality and opposition using weighted multivariable logistic regression. Setting: United States. Participants: Adults aged 18+ years. Results: Among the analytic sample (n=2852), 54% of adults were neutral or opposed to junk food advertising restrictions on social media. The odds of being neutral or opposed were higher among Non-Hispanic Black adults (vs non-Hispanic White; OR: 2.03 (95% CI: 1.26, 3.26)); those completing some college (OR: 1.68 (95% CI: 1.20, 2.34)) or high school or less (OR: 2.62 (95% CI: 1.74, 3.96)) (vs those with a college degree); those who were overweight (vs normal weight; OR: 1.42 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.93)); and those reporting a moderate (OR: 1.45 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.88)) or conservative (OR: 1.71 (95% CI: 1.24, 2.35)) political viewpoint (vs liberal). Having strong (vs weaker) weight and diet-related cancer beliefs was associated with 53% lower odds of being neutral or opposed to advertising restrictions (OR: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.36, 0.61)). Conclusions: This study identified subgroups of US adults for whom targeted communication strategies may increase support for policies to improve children’s food environment.

A qualitative study of e-cigarette use among young people in Ireland: Incentives, disincentives, and putative cessation

Background Smoking prevalence in Ireland is falling in all age groups, but e-cigarette use is rising among young people. This qualitative study explores young people’s accounts of e-cigarette use in Ireland. Methods Semi-structured individual (22) and focus group (8) interviews were conducted with 62 young people aged 18–22 years, recruited from a higher-education institution and youth organisations working with early school-leavers across Dublin. All were smokers or ex-smokers; 41 had tried e-cigarettes, 11 continued as dual users. We identified themes using thematic data analysis. Results Three broad themes were identified: incentivising features, disincentivising features, and ambivalent and unsuccessful cessation, named putative smoking cessation. Incentivising features included price, pleasing taste/ flavours, and the possibility of indoor use. Disincentivising features related to adverse health effects (pain, discomfort, sore throat, coughing, headache) and unpleasant physical effects (bad taste, problems resulting from device faults). Other disincentives were over-consumption arising from inability to control intake, "greater addictiveness", product taste, and device faults. Putative cessation refers to the conflict between participants' expected use of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation/reduction aid and their observed reality of e-cigarettes’ failure in this regard, with reported outcomes including: failure to quit or reduce; continued or resumed cigarette and/or roll-your-own smoking; dual use of e-cigarettes and other tobacco products; and inability to quit e-cigarettes. Conclusions Participants were sceptical about e-cigarettes’ "purported relative healthiness", concerned about addictiveness and potential long-term health consequences, and critically aware of advertising and industry strategies. E-cigarettes were viewed as being less denormalised, in part because they could be used in indoor spaces where smoking is banned in Ireland. Although price, taste, and perceived renormalisation were important motivators for young people's use of e-cigarettes, they wanted to quit smoking. The regulation of e-cigarettes through age restriction of access, licensing of outlets, pricing, point of sale and advertising restrictions as well as through the banning of indoor use should be considered by legislators and tobacco control policymakers.