Broadcasters reject kids' food ads study

The Television Broadcasters Council has disputed claims in a new study that most food advertisements on children's television are for unhealthy food.

The council, which represents free-to-air television companies, questions the accuracy of the research, says executive director Bruce Wallace.

He was responding to a study by Otago University researchers at the Wellington School of Medicine which looked at the frequency and content of advertising on television in the early morning, after school, early evening and weekend mornings and compared the data with that of a similar study carried out in 1997.

The study, Marketing Fat and Sugar to Children on New Zealand Television, found that about 70 per cent of these commercials were for food the researchers describe as "counter to improved nutrition".

It also said children watching television during these times saw an average of 12 food ads an hour, an increase from 1997 when the average was eight.

But Mr Wallace yesterday challenged the findings.

"The researchers have taken just four weeks of air-time on TV2 and TV3 and we don't think that's in any way representative," he said.

They also compared it with a different time period in 1997, with a different pattern of advertising.

The council had obtained TV2 and TV3 viewing figures from Neilsen Media Research for the 2004 calendar year.

These showed the proportion of ads in four categories - fast foods, soft drinks, confectionery and breakfast food - during children's programme times in that period was only 12 to 20 per cent of advertising.

These figures related to children's programme times in the afternoon and in the morning, Mr Wallace said, but the Otago University research included ads appearing during the 6pm news.

"Obviously children watch the news, but it's actually adult programming."

Mr Wallace said the Food Industry Accord, which the council was a signatory to, was focusing on enabling advertising of the health benefits of food.

"We don't think bans make any sense. What we'd like to see is to have an advertiser who has got a healthy food product to be able to say why it's healthy."

He also took issue with the use of the term "unhealthy food".

"It surprises me that an academic researcher uses that term because it's totally and utterly non-academic. There are no such things as unhealthy foods. The only thing there is unhealthy use of a food."

Rather than ban ads, parents should be more responsible for their children's eating habits, Mr Wallace said.

Television advertising was run to very strict codes run by the Advertising Standards Authority, particularly in relation to children.

"There is very rarely a successful complaint lodged about the advertising of food to children," he said.

Green Party health spokeswoman Sue Kedgley said the best option would be for New Zealand to follow the lead of Sweden and Norway, where no advertising at all was allowed during children's viewing hours.

At the very least there should be greater controls.

- NZPA