Ad Industry Says UK Government HFSS Ban Is Set to Fail

In its commitment to lower the level of childhood obesity across the U.K., the Government confirmed that it plans on regulating adverts of high fat, salt and sugar foods across TV and online. This will impact spending from some of the biggest brands in the country. The ban follows Government figures that discovered that one in every three children in England leaving primary education was overweight or obese. In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) called for such a measure to be introduced to protect children. At the time, Dr. João Breda, program manager for WHO said, “We are using the wrong ammunition for a very significant problem. These technological innovations [used by advertisers] make our restrictions void—they no longer work in this context. The digital world is wonderful for marketers—it's more targeted and they can get much more data.” The ban will be in place at the end of 2022. It will run across television with a watershed put in place of 9 p.m. for products that meet the HFSS criteria, with a restriction placed online for ads too. Ofcom, the TV watchdog, will be made responsible for the regulation. While the Advertising Standards Authority has welcomed the clarification of the ban, details of its potential involvement in policing have yet to be determined. Reaction from ad industry bodies Despite opposition from the advertising sector, highlighting the Government’s analysis, the plan will go ahead undeterred. Sue Eustace, public affairs director for the Advertising Association, said in a statement about the ban’s confirmation how the organization was “dismayed” and highlighted that it could also impact pubs and restaurant chains from advertising their menus too. “We all want to see a healthier, more active population, but the Government’s own analysis shows these measures won’t work. Leveling up society will not be achieved by punishing some of the U.K.’s most successful industries for minimal effect on obesity levels,” added Eustace. The possibilities of technology have been ignored, and industry’s attempts to deliver the desired outcome in a way which would also prevent economic harm to business have been waved away—Phil Smith, director-general, ISBA. Other membership bodies have been quick to call foul of the ban in hastily delivered responses. Jon Mew, CEO of the IAB U.K., said that he was “staggered” and how the ban would have “next to no impact” on childhood obesity rates. "The proposal we put forward as an alternative to the ban would further restrict children’s already limited exposure to HFSS ads online, without inflicting unnecessary damage on the advertising, media and hospitality industries,” he added, describing it as “a bad policy” and claiming that it would create an “unequal media landscape” as a result. ISBA’s director-general, Phil Smith, said the advertising community agreed Britain had an obesity problem that needed action. Smith continued saying how the Government had “tied itself in knots” by imposing regulation. “There is no evidence that what Ministers are proposing will have any meaningful impact on children’s health. The possibilities of technology have been ignored, and industry’s attempts to deliver the desired outcome in a way which would also prevent economic harm to business have been waved away,” Smith continued, highlighting the need for economic recovery and claiming that the Government had “plumped for headlines over meaningful reform.” Making similar points, the IPA legal and public affairs director Richard Lindsay described the ban as a government that wanted to be doing something. “A TV watershed restriction will not target children and an online ban ignores more effective measures that would see technology being harnessed to reduce children’s exposure to certain types of ads without damaging businesses. The devil will be in the detail, but loud headlines do not mean good policy,” he added. Food52 Launches Drinks-Focused Vertical, Driving More Commerce and Brand Partnerships