EU Pledge 2016 monitoring

EU Platform for Action on DPAH

Will Gilroy

9 March 2017

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

EU Pledge - Background

What? An industry initiative to change food and beverage advertising to children in the EU

When? Launched in December 2007 (entry into force 01/01/09)

Who? 2007

11 founding members

2009

2010

European Snacks Association:

2011 2012

21 members representing

80%+ food & beverage ad

spend in the EU

2014 2016

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

2016 monitoring covers TV and online

• TV: – Accenture audit (All spots, 8 countries, three months)

• Digital: – Company-owned websites: EASA audit (250 websites,

10 countries)

– Company-owned apps: EASA pilot (20 apps)

– Third party websites: Ebiquity pilot (500 UK websites)

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

TV Monitoring

• Accenture methodology:

– 8 sample EU markets: FR, DE, HU, IT, PL, PT, SP, EE

– Analyse national audience data (Nielsen or similar)

– Review all spots by EU Pledge companies aired in Q1 2016:

• Product: Compliant with nutrition criteria or not?

• Audience: Over or under 35% children <12?

Identify non-compliant spots: i.e. spots for products not meeting companies’ nutritional criteria in programmes with >35% <12 audience

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

TV Monitoring

• 2016 Compliance results

Overall Compliance Results –All Spots

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Exposure monitoring

A downward trend

(Children <12 exposure 2014, 2005 baseline)

Programmes >35% <12 audiences (restricted products)

All programmes (restricted products)

All programmes (all products)

5-year average

- 48%

- 32%

- 83%

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned website Monitoring

Methodology

• EASA compiled a list of websites in 10 EU markets featuring ‘non-compliant’ products;

• National ad standards bodies reviewed 250 websites, focusing on products popular amongst children;

• Results reviewed and agreed by 2 independent experts: Dr Verónica Donoso & Valerie Verdoodt (KU Leuven);

• Workshop with companies held Jan 2017 (present results, explain breaches, promote good practice).

Country SRO

CZ CRPR

FR ARPP

DE DWR

IT IAP

LT LRP

PL RR

SP Autocontrol

SW Reklam- ombudsmannen

NL SRC

UK CAP

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned websites Monitoring

2016 Compliance results

Non-compliant with EU Pledge N=13;

5%

Compliant with EU Pledge N=237;

95%

Compliance with the EU Pledge (N=250)

Source: EASA EU Pledge Report, Jan 2017

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned websites Monitoring

Breach example #1

“The overall creative execution of the website, with its colourful images, readable text, popular characters, toys, as well as music and interactive animations, was considered primarily appealing to children under 12.”

Non-compliant product promotion

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned websites Monitoring

Breach example #2

“Several elements which were considered to be primarily appealing to children under 12 could be found on the website […] According to the reviewer, because of the above elements, the overall look and feel of the website made it primarily appealing to children <12, and therefore in breach of the EU Pledge.”

Non-compliant product promotion

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned websites Monitoring

Breach example #3

The website was considered to be primarily appealing to <12s because of the overall creative execution of the website, the easy-to-play games, the toys used as premiums, as well as the colourful/cartoon-like animations.

Non-compliant product promotion

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned apps Monitoring pilot

Methodology & findings

• National ad standards organisations also reviewed EU Pledge members’ company-owned mobile apps

• Apps would be deemed in breach if:

– Include non-compliant product promotion

– Designed to be primarily appealing to <12s

Out of 20 mobile apps reviewed, one was found in breach

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

Company-owned apps Monitoring pilot

Reported breach

“The mobile application was considered to be primarily appealing to children under 12 due to the presence of elements such as colourful/cartoon-like and interactive animations, as well as plain and easy-to-understand language.”

Non-compliant product promotion

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

3rd party website monitoring

Ebiquity Pilot Methodology 3 avatars were built to create two profiles: Olivia (10 yr old), Henry (45) and a control profile (neutral age and interests)

Aim: Explore what advertising a “typical child” surfing popular websites is exposed to vs. “a typical adult”

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

3rd party website monitoring

Ebiquity Pilot Methodology

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

3rd party website monitoring

Ebiquity Pilot Results

wfanet.org @wfamarketers

3rd party website monitoring

Ebiquity Pilot Results