- Email: [email protected]
Nutrition messages via TV and advertising
wait for the studies to tell us that there is a relation between what children watch and what they do; we can be as sure that this relationship exists as are the advertisers who depend on it to sell their client's products." Peggy Charren, President, and Evelyn Sarson, Executive Director, Action for Children's Television, in testimony before U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, Washington, DC, March 6, 1973. "Over the past years there have been much discussion and disagreement about the comparative significance of methods used in the teaching-learning process.
Arguments about methods, pro and con, vary greatly. At one end of the continuum is the belief that if teachers have adequate subject matter preparation or have developed ways ·of behaving which make possible a positive relationship with students, they will develop, on their own, appropriate methods of teaching. The other extreme is represented by the belief that content and other factors involved in effective teaching and learning can be acquired if the teacher has developed mastery in the skills of teaching. In between these extremes are many, varying points of view." Maurice R. Ahrens, Professor of Education, University of Florida, Gaines-
Current Topics Nutrition Messages Via TV and Advertising Concerns about food advertising, especially that directed toward ,children, CDntinue to be e"pressed by government, industry, and lay organizations. Among the issues involved are establishment of a national policy towards advertising in the public interest, s.cheduling of public service announcements providing useful nutrition information for children, and involvement of the community in the development of TV viewing needs of chi1dren. In a staff report to the Federal Trade Commission, Howard and Hulbert (1) have defined the problem of the consumer as needing assurance that the information available to him is aocurate, relevant, and complete sO' that he may choose between alternative offerings. The challenge to industry and government is for them to ensure the provision of such information as efficiently as possible. The Bureau of Consumer Protection of the FTC serves a "policing" function which involves efforts to detect, challenge, and eliminate the ,consequences of misrepresentation and a "disdO'sure" function involving the development of requirements to ensure that infDrmation in advertising is sufficiently complete that consumers can make sensible 'choices between competing products. The purpose O'f marketing communications, of course, is to ultimately sell a product or service. This report endeavors to examine the state of the advertising industry, the role of advertising in marketing strategy, the aoceptability of advertising techniques, advertising in relation to special audiences, and the state IBb
I
Journal of NUTRITION EDUCATION
of regulatory control of advertising at the present time. The authors propose several recommendations which are of interest to any person concerned with the relatiDn of advertising to nutrition edu~ation.
The report contains many reveaiing thoughts for anyone concerned aJbout behavior change. The advertising industry ~with consideraJble expertise in marketing analysis-is not able, with the present state of knowledge, to definitely pinpoint ,change in practices through exposure to advertising. There are a number of other factors which enter into the consumer's final decision. Nutrition educators would do well to study the report and consider these factors when attempting to change practices through the dissemination of nutrition information. In the area of advertising to young children, it has been shown that preSChODI children have difficulty distinguishing between the advertisement's message and the program which is being viewed. For this reason, there are suggestions made that programs be presented completely without advertising, with advertising being assigned to a certain time-slot, or with only certain kinds of advertising being allowed at children's viewing periods. It is pointed out that the advertiser currently is not too accurate in identifying his target audience; however, studies in this area are being improved. (Peggy Charren seems to disagree. See NDtable and Quotable p.185.) Robert Choate organized a group called "On Second Thought" to produce a series of public service announcements designed to educate 'listeners to better nutritional habits. Copies of the scripts
ville, Methods can make a difference, Educ. Leadership, 30:700, 1973.
"Currently, nutrient labeling is attracting increasing interest and attention. This is a step in the right directiDn-and only a step. It is a means to a desirable endnot an end in itself. Nutrient labeling alone will accomplish little, but it can, in the long run, become a valuable adjunct informing and educating the consumer about the rudimentary principles of human nutrition." Charles F. Niven, Director of Research, Del Monte Corp., Nutrition awareness-where does the responsibility lie?, Food Prod. Develop., 7 (No.4) :6, May, 1973. -which 'were reviewed by Society for Nutrition Education staff for accuracywere sent to a number of television stations. These were made available without cost. About one-third of the stations receiving these announcements accepted them. The three major television netwDrks refused the announcements, indicating that they would prefer to produce their own. On May 8, 1973, Choate, as chairman of The Council on Children, Media and Merchandising, stated in a news release: "Under the Fairness Doctrine of the Federal Communications Act, broadcasters are required to air two or more sides of controversial issues of public importance. The networks have not explained to children or to their parents the controversy swirling around programming, promotional spots, and 'commercials directed at children." Action for Children's Television (ACT), based in Boston, has gone on record requesting that a national trade regulation rule be established prohibiting all television advertising of edible products directed to children (3). The Committee Dn Children's Television (CCT) in San Francisco recently released a statement, 'The Need for a National Model of Effective Community/Broadcaster Cooperation (4)." CCT propDses a broad community involvement to improve the total television programming for children in conjunction with local involvement of the broadcaster to ensure an educational approach to children's learning through television. H.D.U.
REFERENCES 1. Howard, J. A. and Hulbert, I.,Advertising and the Public Interest, A Staff Report to the Federal Trade Commission; Appendix One: Toy Advertising Guidelines and Advertising Guidelines for Children's Premiums and Offers; Apendix Two: A ReVOL. S, NO.3, JULY-SEPT., 1973
view of Advertising Research; Appendix Three: An Annotated Bibliography of the
Testimony, Written Submissions and Other Documents Submitted for the Public Record; and A Subject and Author Index to the Report (Chapters One to Nine)
and to Appendix Three, 1973. From The Secretary, Federal Trade Commission, 6th & Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20580. Single copies available upon request. 2. Choate, R. B., personal communication, Council on Children, Media and Merchandising, 1346 Connecticut Ave., Washington, DC 20036. 3. Action for Children's Television (ACT),
Supplementary Filing Relating to ACT Petition to Prohibit Advertising of Edibles on Children's Television, before the
Federal Trade Commission, January, 1973.
4. The Need for a National Model of Effective Community/Broadcaster Cooperation. The Committee on Children's
Television, 1511 Masonic Ave., San Francisco, CA 94117, June 1973.
Some of the information that may appear on nutrition labels is new "vocabulary" to consumers. For example, nutrients such as zinc, pantothenic add, biotin, copper, and vitamin B-6 have rarely been listed on food labels before and are not often discussed in consumer education materials. To what extent will the consumer be able to make use of all this nutrition information? White (7) feels that consumers may find nutrient labeling useful for: a) comparisons between brands; b) comparisons within a given class of foods, e.g. pancakes vs. waffles; c) comparison between different classes of food, e.g. meat vs. dairy foods; and d) comparison with pre-existing knowledge, e.g. that a food is "better," "as good as," or "poorer" than the consumer thought. White points out that the sheer verhiage involved will not allow for much actual
detailed in-store label reading. Semrow (8) criticizes the suitability of the reguIations for the consumer on the grounds th'at "Mrs. Conmmer" could not hope to keep track of all the nutrients for each family member on a daily basis and feels that, in fact, the regulations will only cover very few foods. These are valid misgivings and limitations of the nutrition Iabeling regulations. However, nutrition labeling is here and is likely to stay. Consumers are going to need advice and assistance on interpreting the nutrition labels meaningfully; are you ready to help them? Here are a few suggestions on how you can help: 1. Familiarize yourself with the substance of the regulations. The appendix to the article "Nutrition labeling: a summary and evaluation," (1. Nutr. Educ., 5: 121, 1973) is a good resource. Also,
A Wind of Change: Nutrition Labeling Regulations The Food and Drug Administration nutrition Ialbeling regulations finalized last March (I) are as complex-in their own way-as are the IRS income tax regulations. 'J1heir publication set into motion a significant series of developments which indicate future trends. Nutrition labeling is likely to bring ahout major changes in: a) available nutrition information; b) food advertising and marketing practices; and c) the nutritional quality of the u.S. food supply.
Available Nutrition Information Although the regulations will, to some extent, satisfy the consumer's "right to know," consumer advocates such as James Turner wish the reguIations were mandatory, not voluntary (2,3). A few major food companies, e.'g., Del Monte, have announced their intentions to use nutrition labelling on their products at an early date (4). The Hormel Company is explaining its nutrition labels to consumers via advertisements (5). It is possible that nutrition labeling-like fortification -will generate a ra,ce among food companies to such an extent that nutrition labeling appears on most food products with significant nutritional value; the need for mandatory labeling would then be virtually eliminated. Massachusetts has passed regulations which include provision for mandatory nutrition laJbeling of foods sold in the state (6), but the plan is meeting strong opposition on the grounds of possible pre-emption of FDA. VOL. 5, NO.3, JULY·SEPT., 1973
Reproduced by permission of Food Product Development
Journal of NUTRITION EDUCATION
I
187
Arguments about methods, pro and con, vary greatly. At one end of the continuum is the belief that if teachers have adequate subject matter preparation or have developed ways ·of behaving which make possible a positive relationship with students, they will develop, on their own, appropriate methods of teaching. The other extreme is represented by the belief that content and other factors involved in effective teaching and learning can be acquired if the teacher has developed mastery in the skills of teaching. In between these extremes are many, varying points of view." Maurice R. Ahrens, Professor of Education, University of Florida, Gaines-
Current Topics Nutrition Messages Via TV and Advertising Concerns about food advertising, especially that directed toward ,children, CDntinue to be e"pressed by government, industry, and lay organizations. Among the issues involved are establishment of a national policy towards advertising in the public interest, s.cheduling of public service announcements providing useful nutrition information for children, and involvement of the community in the development of TV viewing needs of chi1dren. In a staff report to the Federal Trade Commission, Howard and Hulbert (1) have defined the problem of the consumer as needing assurance that the information available to him is aocurate, relevant, and complete sO' that he may choose between alternative offerings. The challenge to industry and government is for them to ensure the provision of such information as efficiently as possible. The Bureau of Consumer Protection of the FTC serves a "policing" function which involves efforts to detect, challenge, and eliminate the ,consequences of misrepresentation and a "disdO'sure" function involving the development of requirements to ensure that infDrmation in advertising is sufficiently complete that consumers can make sensible 'choices between competing products. The purpose O'f marketing communications, of course, is to ultimately sell a product or service. This report endeavors to examine the state of the advertising industry, the role of advertising in marketing strategy, the aoceptability of advertising techniques, advertising in relation to special audiences, and the state IBb
I
Journal of NUTRITION EDUCATION
of regulatory control of advertising at the present time. The authors propose several recommendations which are of interest to any person concerned with the relatiDn of advertising to nutrition edu~ation.
The report contains many reveaiing thoughts for anyone concerned aJbout behavior change. The advertising industry ~with consideraJble expertise in marketing analysis-is not able, with the present state of knowledge, to definitely pinpoint ,change in practices through exposure to advertising. There are a number of other factors which enter into the consumer's final decision. Nutrition educators would do well to study the report and consider these factors when attempting to change practices through the dissemination of nutrition information. In the area of advertising to young children, it has been shown that preSChODI children have difficulty distinguishing between the advertisement's message and the program which is being viewed. For this reason, there are suggestions made that programs be presented completely without advertising, with advertising being assigned to a certain time-slot, or with only certain kinds of advertising being allowed at children's viewing periods. It is pointed out that the advertiser currently is not too accurate in identifying his target audience; however, studies in this area are being improved. (Peggy Charren seems to disagree. See NDtable and Quotable p.185.) Robert Choate organized a group called "On Second Thought" to produce a series of public service announcements designed to educate 'listeners to better nutritional habits. Copies of the scripts
ville, Methods can make a difference, Educ. Leadership, 30:700, 1973.
"Currently, nutrient labeling is attracting increasing interest and attention. This is a step in the right directiDn-and only a step. It is a means to a desirable endnot an end in itself. Nutrient labeling alone will accomplish little, but it can, in the long run, become a valuable adjunct informing and educating the consumer about the rudimentary principles of human nutrition." Charles F. Niven, Director of Research, Del Monte Corp., Nutrition awareness-where does the responsibility lie?, Food Prod. Develop., 7 (No.4) :6, May, 1973. -which 'were reviewed by Society for Nutrition Education staff for accuracywere sent to a number of television stations. These were made available without cost. About one-third of the stations receiving these announcements accepted them. The three major television netwDrks refused the announcements, indicating that they would prefer to produce their own. On May 8, 1973, Choate, as chairman of The Council on Children, Media and Merchandising, stated in a news release: "Under the Fairness Doctrine of the Federal Communications Act, broadcasters are required to air two or more sides of controversial issues of public importance. The networks have not explained to children or to their parents the controversy swirling around programming, promotional spots, and 'commercials directed at children." Action for Children's Television (ACT), based in Boston, has gone on record requesting that a national trade regulation rule be established prohibiting all television advertising of edible products directed to children (3). The Committee Dn Children's Television (CCT) in San Francisco recently released a statement, 'The Need for a National Model of Effective Community/Broadcaster Cooperation (4)." CCT propDses a broad community involvement to improve the total television programming for children in conjunction with local involvement of the broadcaster to ensure an educational approach to children's learning through television. H.D.U.
REFERENCES 1. Howard, J. A. and Hulbert, I.,Advertising and the Public Interest, A Staff Report to the Federal Trade Commission; Appendix One: Toy Advertising Guidelines and Advertising Guidelines for Children's Premiums and Offers; Apendix Two: A ReVOL. S, NO.3, JULY-SEPT., 1973
view of Advertising Research; Appendix Three: An Annotated Bibliography of the
Testimony, Written Submissions and Other Documents Submitted for the Public Record; and A Subject and Author Index to the Report (Chapters One to Nine)
and to Appendix Three, 1973. From The Secretary, Federal Trade Commission, 6th & Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20580. Single copies available upon request. 2. Choate, R. B., personal communication, Council on Children, Media and Merchandising, 1346 Connecticut Ave., Washington, DC 20036. 3. Action for Children's Television (ACT),
Supplementary Filing Relating to ACT Petition to Prohibit Advertising of Edibles on Children's Television, before the
Federal Trade Commission, January, 1973.
4. The Need for a National Model of Effective Community/Broadcaster Cooperation. The Committee on Children's
Television, 1511 Masonic Ave., San Francisco, CA 94117, June 1973.
Some of the information that may appear on nutrition labels is new "vocabulary" to consumers. For example, nutrients such as zinc, pantothenic add, biotin, copper, and vitamin B-6 have rarely been listed on food labels before and are not often discussed in consumer education materials. To what extent will the consumer be able to make use of all this nutrition information? White (7) feels that consumers may find nutrient labeling useful for: a) comparisons between brands; b) comparisons within a given class of foods, e.g. pancakes vs. waffles; c) comparison between different classes of food, e.g. meat vs. dairy foods; and d) comparison with pre-existing knowledge, e.g. that a food is "better," "as good as," or "poorer" than the consumer thought. White points out that the sheer verhiage involved will not allow for much actual
detailed in-store label reading. Semrow (8) criticizes the suitability of the reguIations for the consumer on the grounds th'at "Mrs. Conmmer" could not hope to keep track of all the nutrients for each family member on a daily basis and feels that, in fact, the regulations will only cover very few foods. These are valid misgivings and limitations of the nutrition Iabeling regulations. However, nutrition labeling is here and is likely to stay. Consumers are going to need advice and assistance on interpreting the nutrition labels meaningfully; are you ready to help them? Here are a few suggestions on how you can help: 1. Familiarize yourself with the substance of the regulations. The appendix to the article "Nutrition labeling: a summary and evaluation," (1. Nutr. Educ., 5: 121, 1973) is a good resource. Also,
A Wind of Change: Nutrition Labeling Regulations The Food and Drug Administration nutrition Ialbeling regulations finalized last March (I) are as complex-in their own way-as are the IRS income tax regulations. 'J1heir publication set into motion a significant series of developments which indicate future trends. Nutrition labeling is likely to bring ahout major changes in: a) available nutrition information; b) food advertising and marketing practices; and c) the nutritional quality of the u.S. food supply.
Available Nutrition Information Although the regulations will, to some extent, satisfy the consumer's "right to know," consumer advocates such as James Turner wish the reguIations were mandatory, not voluntary (2,3). A few major food companies, e.'g., Del Monte, have announced their intentions to use nutrition labelling on their products at an early date (4). The Hormel Company is explaining its nutrition labels to consumers via advertisements (5). It is possible that nutrition labeling-like fortification -will generate a ra,ce among food companies to such an extent that nutrition labeling appears on most food products with significant nutritional value; the need for mandatory labeling would then be virtually eliminated. Massachusetts has passed regulations which include provision for mandatory nutrition laJbeling of foods sold in the state (6), but the plan is meeting strong opposition on the grounds of possible pre-emption of FDA. VOL. 5, NO.3, JULY·SEPT., 1973
Reproduced by permission of Food Product Development
Journal of NUTRITION EDUCATION
I
187