The official publication of proposed voluntary US government guidelines for advertising food to children has been delayed but is now expected to happen next month. Food industry representatives were critical of the draft guidelines released in December, Ben Cooper writes, and may find the final proposals no more to their liking.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Food marketers in the US are getting used to a more engaged approach to food policy from the White House since the Obamas took up residence.
There is not only a new sheriff in town but a new sheriff’s wife, with Michelle Obama complementing the President’s more proactive approach to policy with her Let’s Move childhood obesity campaign. But while the industry has praised Mrs Obama’s campaign, it has been far less comfortable with what the administration might be envisaging for children’s food advertising.
Last year, government agencies were commissioned to come up with voluntary guidelines stipulating what foods should be advertised to children. However, the final report from the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children, comprising the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), has been delayed.
It was due to publish its final proposals early this year, with a report going to Congress in July, following an official consultation period. Industry was highly critical of the draft guidelines published last December, stating that the nutritional criteria were too proscriptive.
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataThe delay is believed to be due to the FDA, USDA and CDC, which are working specifically on the nutritional standards, failing to agree on the final nutritional criteria. But the discussions now appear to be closer to reaching their conclusion.
“The agencies have not been able to come up with a proposed standard they all can agree on as of yet but it will happen,” said Keith Fentonmiller, senior attorney at the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “I think within the next 30 days it’s likely that they’ll have agreed on something, and then our commission [FTC] would have to say this is OK to put out for public comment.”
Under ordinary circumstances this could result in a report going to Congress as early as December, though in this instance the process is likely to take longer. Judging by the response to the draft proposals, the guidelines can be expected to attract a significant and detailed response both from industry and other stakeholders, quite possibly requiring an extended consultation period.
It is not known whether the delay signifies that there has been pressure from one or more of the agencies to soften the guidelines in response to the industry’s initial complaints.
Fentonmiller would not expand on the details of the discussions. He said the plan is to come up with nutritional criteria that are “meaningful and rigorous” but not “so daunting that industry will say we just can’t do this”. However, he said while there would be some “tweaking”, he did not expect the final guidelines to be “dramatically different” from those published in December.
Industry advocates are also not expecting significant changes. “I don’t really expect them to be markedly different,” said Maureen Enright, assistant director of the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI), an industry self-regulatory programme comprising major food companies.
Enright said she hoped the delay may be partly down to consideration being given to the progress made through self-regulation. “We like to think that there’s also some recognition being given to the fact that industry and the CFBAI have been driving change and that there has been change.”
Dan Jaffe, executive vice president government of relations at the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), also said he hoped the working group will have made adjustments to draft guidelines that were “ill- considered”.
Jaffe said: “If companies were to voluntarily agree to the standards as presented in draft virtually none of the foods that are advertised would meet the required criteria. When they come out with their proposals they will hopefully have adjusted them.”
Like Enright, Jaffe believes the working group should take account of how industry has already responded to the problem. “We in the advertising community have been very active in responding to obesity concerns,” he said. “We are committed to this but we want to make sure that whatever is done is done in a reasonable and sensible and logical manner, and we certainly hope that will be the case when they come forward with the more finalised proposals.”
While the mooted guidelines are technically voluntary, they would have the weight of government behind them. With such measures there is generally an implied sense that regulation could follow if industry does not comply. In fact, in this instance the threat is not implicit but quite clear. At an FTC forum in December David Vladeck, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said that if industry’s response was not satisfactory, legislation could be considered.
“It’s clearly voluntarism with a hammer being held over people’s heads,” Jaffe said.
If the guidelines are little different from the draft criteria, the consultation could be a lively affair. “I’m sure if there will be an opportunity to comment and give any additional formal input, we would probably take that opportunity and I imagine some of our participants would do that also,” Enright said.
Other stakeholders, including consumer advocacy groups such as the Consumer Federation of America and the Center for Science in the Public Interest, are also likely to participate.
However, there is a feeling among industry representatives that in any form the guidelines represent a further tier of regulation – albeit ‘voluntary’ – that is unnecessary, given the progress of industry-led work. “Even our critics have felt there has been some change, so we don’t believe there is a need for standardisation by the Government,” Enright said.
Now would seem an opportune moment to suggest there is already enough government involvement in this area as this year sees both the re-setting of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the re-ratification of the Childhood Nutrition Bill.
The Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) have been published jointly every five years since 1980 by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the USDA. They will be formally issued later this year following an ongoing consultation in which industry groups are participating.
This year should also see the re-ratification of the Childhood Nutrition Bill which establishes national nutrition standards in line with the DGAs for all foods sold in schools. This was passed by the Senate earlier this month and will now go before Congress where it is also expected to be approved. This legislation has been expanded in light of the battle against childhood obesity.
The suggestion that there is already enough legislation appears not to be shared by the White House. Rather, the Obama administration’s strong views on childhood obesity suggest there will be continued pressure from the President to follow through on the implementation of the advertising guidelines.
If the guidelines are published next month as the FTC now expects, and in a form that remains highly prohibitive, the industry will face a difficult dilemma as the consultation process begins. While wanting to remain ‘on-message’ with regard to the fight against obesity, it may be compelled to publicly oppose measures that, if implemented, would necessitate a dramatic re-appraisal of food companies’ advertising strategies.
