Consumer behaviour

CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR PROJECT

Submitted to : Mrs. Shivani raheja

Submitted by : KAPIL KUMAR (14/BBE/065) AYUSHI JAIN (14/BBE/089)

Case study: Does food marketing to children cause obesity?

KEY POINTS The case study talks about the impact of T.V ads on children

and has described these through examples of increase in violent crimes that have been partially attributed to the widespread depiction of violence on T.V.

It addresses the question whether the growing rate of obesity and associated illness among children and teenagers due to overconsumption of high calorie and high fat foods are the result of heavy promotion of food.

According to a study advertises spend about $10 billion a year in which most of the items advertised are high in fat and sugar but low in nutrition.

Due to this several consumer advocacy group have called for restricting the advertising of “Junk food” on T.V and regulating the advertisements shown to children.

IMPACT OF THESE Recognizing these concerns and facing

legal restriction on their advertising to children. Some fast-food companies eliminated the “super size” serving from their menus, started offering and advertising more healthy products.

Marketers of major brands of soft drinks, voluntarily, stopped marketing full-calorie carbonated drinks in elementary schools and are developing healthier soft drinks.

QUESTION 1.Ques - Do you believe that the government, rather than

parents only, should regulate the consumption behaviour of children? Why or why not?

More than the govt. the parents should be responsible for the eating habits of their kids.

I believe that eating habits of children is largely related to the environment they have been brought up in and the meals that they are served at home . 

Since these habits are cultivated in children from a very young age and it has

been found that it is only when a child reaches the age of 10 to 12 he/she can understand the movites and aims behing the advertisements..Therefore it is the parents who play a huge role in regultaing the eating habits of their children.

Ques 2 -Some maintain that it is strictly up to parents to determine what their children eat and educate them about eating, and, therefore, food marketers should not be blamed for the increases in children’s obesity and regulating of foods to children must not be regulated.Others say that parents who are trying to get their children to eat right cannot effectively compete with the heavy advertising of foods to the children and the widespread presence of “junk food”, and that children are likely to pick up bad eating habits regardless of what their parents might try and teach them. Therefore, the advertising of foods to children must be regulated.Which position do you agree with and why?

Food and drink marketing is a vast industry growing with each passing day, and children are among its prime targets .Food advertising and other forms of marketing have been shown to influence children’s food preferences, purchasing behaviour and overall dietary behaviour.

It has also been associated with an increased risk of overweight and obesity in children.

The habits children develop early in life may encourage them to adopt unhealthy dietary practices which persist into adulthood, increasing the likelihood of overweight, obesity and associated health problems such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.

AT the same time food co.s are spending billions on these advertisements in order to make them work

Food ads on television make up 50 percent of all the ad time on children’s shows. These ads are almost completely dominated by unhealthy food products (34 percent for candy and snacks, 28 percent for cereal, 10 percent for fast food, 4 percent for dairy products, 1 percent for fruit juices, and 0 percent for fruits or vegetables).

Children are rarely exposed to public service announcements or advertising for healthier foods. 

However, according to a new study  parents can help overcome this clever marketing -- although it will take some work.

The researchers behind the study had 75 children, ages 3-5, watch cartoons which were interrupted by ads either for French fries or apples and dipping sauce. They were then allowed to choose coupons for either of the two foods -- but half of the parents in each group remained neutral with the other half encouraged the kids to make the healthy choice.

If parents said nothing, about 71 percent of the children who had watched French fry ads chose that coupon. But when parents urged their kids to make the healthy choice, only 55 percent of the kids chose French fries. For the kids who had seen the apples and dipping sauce ad, only 46 percent made the unhealthy French fry choice when the parents remained neutral.

This difference in and of itself underlines the power of advertising. But when the parents encouraged them to go for the apples, only 33 percent of them opted for the fries.

While there's a clear trend in the results of the study, it wasn't as great as had been expected. Lead author Christopher Ferguson says, "Parental encouragement to eat healthy was somewhat able to help undo the message of commercials, although the effects of parents were smaller than we had anticipated."

But small or not, the effect was there, so parents should not feel that they don't play an important role in their kids' food choices. It's not easy to compete with Scooby Doo packaging, but, as Ferguson says, "parents are not powerless.“

Rather than banning child directed advertising, children should be encouraged about healthy eating habits by their parents and teachers.

Parents can limit the excessive time spent watching TV, video, gaming, or surfing the web by their kids.

They can lead by example by eating healthy foods and engaging in physical activities themselves.

Parents can also counter advertising strategies is by educating children to understand that the main goal of advertising is to make them buy things—often things they do not need and did not know they wanted until they have seen advertisements—a

WAYS FAST FOOD COMPANIES LURE US AROMA MARKETING MAKES THEIR PRODUCTS VIRTUALLY

IRRESISTIBLE. certain food chains uses ingredients to enhance the aroma of

their food. The smell of food greatly affects its taste, so aroma

ingredients are usually added to make fake flavours taste more realistic.

COLOURS THAT WILL TRIGGER YOUR APPETITE

The majority of major fast food chains stick to a similar colour scheme in their branding.

Studies have shown that these warm colours in particular activate your hunger and grab your attention.

EYE-CATCHING BILLBOARDS

They know that seeing these food banners can stimulate unplanned consumption even when you’re not hungry.

THEY TURNED SODA INTO A SIDE DISH.

Before Cokes were included in combo meals, most fast food customers didn’t buy them. But once they started grouping it with burgers and fries, soda sales skyrocketed

THEY PRETEND THAT BUYING HAPPY MEALS IS THE SAME AS HELPING SICK CHILDREN.

As detailed in the recent report, Clowning Around With Charity, McDonald’s has made a lot of money convincing customers that buying a burger is donating to charity. In 2010, for example, the chain claimed that it would donate “proceeds” from all sold Happy Meals to the Ronald McDonald House. But it turned out that by “proceeds” they meant “a penny.”

REGULATORY BODY THAT CHECKS MISLEADING ADVERTISEMENTS

Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) is a self-regulatory voluntary organization of the advertising industry in India. It is a non-Government body.

ASCI founded in 1985. . The aim of ASCI is to maintain and enhance the public's confidence in advertising.

ASCI has drawn up a comprehensive advertisingcode for self-regulation. The four fundamental principles of the

codeare:1. To ensure the truthfulness and honesty of representations

andclaims made by advertisements and to safeguard againstmisleading advertisements.2. To ensure that advertisements are not offensive to generallyaccepted standards of public decency.3. To safeguard against the indiscriminate use of advertising

for thepromotion of products which are regarded as hazardous to

societyor to individuals to a degree or of a type which is unacceptable

tosociety at large.4. To ensure that advertisements observe fairness in

competitionso that the consumer’s need to be informed on choices in themarket place and the cannons of generally accepted

competitivebehaviour in business are both served.  

WHO REGULATES THE LAWS RELATED TO FOODFOOD SAFETY AND STANDARDS ACT, 2006

This relatively new law has a provision to deal with false and

misleading advertisements pertaining to food.

Here, the word advertisement includes advertisement and publicity through all media, including the electronic media. Even promotional material on labels, wrappers and invoice are brought under the definition .

Section 24 of the Act (Restrictions of advertisement andprohibition as to unfair trade practices) says that:

(1) No advertisement shall be made of any food which is misleadingor deceiving or contravenes the provisions of this Act, the rulesand regulations made there under.

(2) No person shall engage himself in any unfair trade practice forpurpose of promoting the sale, supply, use and consumption ofarticles of food or adopt any unfair or deceptive practice includingthe practice of making any statement, whether orally or in writingor by visible representation which -a. falsely represents that the foods are of a particularstandard, quality, quantity or grade-composition;b. makes a false or misleading representation concerningthe need for, or the usefulness;c. gives to the public any guarantee of the efficacy that isnot based on an adequate or scientific justification

EXAMPLE OF MISLEADING AD RELATED TO FOOD

COMPANY: "Sri Sri Ayurveda Trust "PRODUCT: "Ojasvita Health Drink"

COMPLAINT: “Often what’s tasty is not healthy, and what’s

healthy is not tasty. Ojasvita is the ultimate combination of good health and great taste. Ojasvita’s 7 Power Herbs support your daily mental fitness needs, while its awesome new taste delights you!”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“The advertisement on art of living YouTube account showcases a child being stopped from choosing or eating food options which the mother considers unhealthy. Then he goes to a shopping mall and there he gets ojasvita health supplement drink from a volunteer counter and the mother agree on that.

The voice over explains that this drink has health and taste both and there good for the child. It claims health benefits, fit body, sharp mind with no information on serving portions and sugar contents. We have also seen an advertisement in newspapers on 30th March 2016

. This advertisement by Sri Sri Nature foods is misleading as it gives no information on the percentage of sugar in the drink and claims a highly processed food supplement as natural, which it is not.

The age group it targets is children. The pack of the product and commercial does not give clear information on the servings of drinks which is half information.

We researched and checked the label of ojasvita and found out it has 41.9 gram sugar per 100 grams. This commercial by providing partial info. Is misleading consumers by putting their children's health at stake. This product also claims health, wellness, fit body and mind with no scientific grounds. How can a product with added flavours, preservatives and high sugar can claim to be healthy?? Please take suitable action in public interest.”

Recommendation: UPHELD "The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing

with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The Advertiser was provided an opportunity to discuss their submission via tele-conferencing as well. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues, that Product is enriched with seven herbs like Ashwagandha , Brahmi , Bringaraj, satavari, S.Shankapushpi, Jyothismathi, Kalimusali which have proven health benefits. They confirmed in the telecon that it is an Ayurvedic Product. The CCC noted that while the advertiser asserts to have seven ayurvedic ingredients, no evidence was provided to indicate their content in the product and any technical rationale or clinical evidence to substantiate the claim of the product supporting “daily mental fitness needs” by virtue of these ingredients. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Ojasvita’s 7 Power Herbs support your daily mental fitness needs” is not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement violated Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

OTHER MISLEADING ADVERTISEMENT

OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION Companies around the world are spending huge amount of money marketing

their products among the children through advertisements on T.V, Print media, Social media, Ratio, etc.

As these kids have huge control over the flow of their parents spending statistics show 8-12 year olds spend $150 billion of their parents spending.

At the same time it has been observed that marketing directly to children is a factor that contributes to child obesity.

Marketing also encourages eating disorders, youth violence, stereotyping among kids.

At the same time marketing also influence the elderly through covert or masked marketing or by conveying socially undesirable stereotypes and images in products and advertisements.

There is a need for marketers to understand the importance of ethics in marketing so that honest and fair practices are followed in the market.

It also becomes the responsibility of the regulators to regulate the working of the marketers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Consumer behaviour by Leon G. Schiffman, Leslie Lazar Kanuk,S.Ramesh Kumar.

Following link is used

http://www.ascioline.org/index.php/asci-decisions.html

Thank you