ADVERTISING: Screen test

Alcohol Concern is calling for a ban on TV alcohol advertising before 9pm. Alan Lodge asks whether such a move would work.

Alcohol companies and trade groups have expressed their exasperation after campaigners called for a 9pm watershed on alcohol advertising on television in the UK.

In submitting its proposal, Alcohol Concern highlighted the fact that many children would have watched adverts for drinks brands during England’s World Cup matches in the summer.

The adverts concerned were screened between 8pm and 10pm and were all within advertising regulations, but the charity said it was “unacceptable” that children watching the games were exposed to alcohol advertising at all.

Chief executive Don Shenker also called for a ban on alcohol sponsorship of sports and music events, which would effectively spell the end of world-famous sponsored events such as rugby’s Heineken Cup, football’s Carling Cup and festivals such as the Tennents-backed T in the Park.

Shenker said: “It is simply unacceptable that vast numbers of children are so frequently exposed to alcohol advertising, leading to higher levels of drinking among young people and increasingly higher levels of harm.

“Alcohol producers and advertising regulators are clearly not taking their responsibilities seriously enough and only a watershed ban on TV and an internet ban will prevent the vast majority of children from being exposed to alcohol marketing.”

The claims have met with both anger and confusion in the trade. Adam Withrington, communications manager at Carlsberg UK, said: “Carlsberg UK’s advertising sticks to ASA regulations and we market and sell our products in line with the Portman Group code.

“There is no evidence to suggest that advertising increases the amount drunk by children. Brand advertising is about brand switching and not about increasing consumption.”

There is also confusion over what Shenker is basing his claims upon. Pointing to a recent Stirling University study that found no link between awareness of alcohol marketing at age 13 and the onset of drinking, Wine and Spirit Trade Association chief executive Jeremy Beadles said: “Alcohol Concern’s claim that advertising of alcohol drinks leads to higher levels of drinking among under 18s is not supported by the evidence.”

Rules and regulations

It might have been something of a sore point for alcohol companies in recent years, but the increased regulation governing the marketing of alcohol and the inflated scrutiny it has come under has actually served to stand it in good stead when it comes to fighting off such criticisms as those of Shenker.

The Advertising Standards Association code states that alcohol ads cannot run in shows where the proportion of 10- to 15-year-olds viewing is 20% higher than the general population. Trade associations representing the drinks industry argue that calls for a ban are too heavy handed.

“Alcohol marketing in the UK is strictly regulated to ensure it is responsible and aimed at adults,” said David Poley, chief executive of drinks industry lobbying organisation the Portman Group.

“Advertising of alcohol on TV is not allowed if the proportion of under-18s in the audience rises to a certain level. One cannot eliminate under-18s from the audience altogether without imposing a total advertising ban. There is very little evidence to suggest that children’s exposure to alcohol marketing is associated with either the onset of drinking or amount consumed.”

The Advertising Association backed the Portman Group’s view and expressed its exasperation at Shenker’s outburst: “The industry is as keen as anyone to prevent alcohol misuse which is why we are disappointed that, yet again, misplaced calls for advertising bans are taking our eye off the real causes,” said a spokesman. “This report is highly selective and ignores the wealth of research which shows no link between alcohol advertising and irresponsible drinking.

“Sensible but strict rules about when and how alcohol can be advertised are already in place to protect young people. Alcohol Concern’s demands are poorly evidenced, won’t work and will cause unnecessary damage in the process.”

That unnecessary damage would, of course, hit the people working in the drinks trade, from shop-floor level right to the top.
Beadles added: “The truth is that the marketing and advertising restrictions Alcohol Concern seeks would hit the pockets of millions of consumers and threaten the livelihoods of thousands of people working in the media, advertising and television, not to mention the drinks industry.”

The British Beer and Pub Association moved the debate on somewhat, saying that the changing ways in which the UK public accesses television and web content makes it impossible to prevent the possibility of under-18s viewing alcohol marketing material, and that the argument put forward by Alcohol Concern demonstrates a lack of understanding about the modern world.

“This study by Alcohol Concern clearly shows that all alcohol advertising around the World Cup fully complied with current independent regulation,” said a spokesman.

“Calls for a watershed ban are so last century. In an age of Sky Plus and people watching TV programmes at any time they choose on the internet, what is the watershed?”

The very notion of the “watershed” is, as the BBPA suggests, an ailing concept. Rebecca Perry, corporate social responsibility and communications manager at Diageo, called the watershed concept “simplistic” and accused Alcohol Concern of stirring up a fuss without doing their research.

“The trouble is they are media-savvy and they know what makes a good headline,” she said. “Healthy debate is a good thing, but it has to be based on hard evidence.

“In the past when people have made suggestions about the future direction of alcohol advertising the industry has been more than happy to take ideas on board and discuss them logically.

“However, when statements are perhaps made for purely headline-grabbing purposes, the discussion should be best left to the tabloid press.”

Change will be needed to address the situation, but the trade certainly feels that placing the blame at the door of alcohol companies is both unfair and ignorant.

Digital television and broadband internet have revolutionised the way the consumer is exposed to advertising and, while those in charge of overseeing its content have accepted it is near-impossible to control who sees what these days, alcohol is more heavily regulated than perhaps any other area of advertising.

To suggest that drinks firms are “not taking their responsibilities seriously enough” displays a total lack of knowledge of the subject matter.

Alan Lodge, from the November 2010 edition of the drinks business