"This policy was first announced eight years ago and in that time there have been eight consultations and four delays. Partly due to pressure from the industry, these delays and adjustments mean that the restrictions intended to keep us healthy are operating at a fraction of their potential. This policy is at risk of being a paper tiger."
"The government has hailed the ban on advertising foods high in fat, salt and sugar, which came into force on 5 January, as a decisive and world-leading move that will remove 7.2bn calories from UK children's diets every year. But it has been delayed, watered down and narrowed in scope so much after food industry lobbying that it will be mostly ineffective."
"In particular, food producers will switch much of their advertising spend from pre-watershed TV and online, which are covered by the ban, to outdoor sites and advertisers' own social media accounts, which are not. Nesta said loopholes in the ban include it covering too few types of unhealthy food, ministers agreeing with the industry's demand that brand advertising should still be allowed."
The UK government implemented a ban on advertising high-fat, salt, and sugar foods on 5 January, claiming it would remove 7.2 billion calories from children's diets annually. However, research by innovation agency Nesta reveals the policy has been significantly weakened through eight years of consultations and four delays caused by food industry pressure. The ban covers only 190 million of 2.4 billion pounds in annual food advertising spending, expected to drop to just 20 million as companies redirect spending to unregulated channels. Major loopholes include exemptions for outdoor advertising, billboards, brand advertising, and social media accounts. Food producers will shift advertising from regulated pre-watershed TV and online platforms to unregulated outdoor sites and their own social media, rendering the policy largely ineffective.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]