IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v104y2021ics0306919221001184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Whose rights deserve protection? Framing analysis of responses to the 2016 Committee of Advertising Practice consultation on the non-broadcast advertising of foods and soft drinks to children

Author

Listed:
  • Carters-White, Lauren
  • Chambers, Stephanie
  • Skivington, Kathryn
  • Hilton, Shona

Abstract

Exposure to advertising of food and beverages high in fat sugar and salt (HFSS) is considered a factor in the development of childhood obesity. This paper uses framing analysis to examine the strategic discursive practices employed by non-industry and industry responders to the Committee of Advertising Practice’s consultation responses (n = 86) on UK regulation of non-broadcast advertising of foods and soft drinks to children. Our analysis demonstrates non-industry and industry responders engaged in a moral framing battle centred on whose rights were deemed as being of greatest importance to protect: children or industry. Both industry and non-industry responders acknowledged that childhood obesity and non-broadcast advertising were complex issues but diverged on how they morally framed their arguments. Non-industry responders employed a moral framework that aligned with the values represented in social justice approaches to public health policy, where children were identified as vulnerable, in need of protection from harmful HFSS product advertising and childhood obesity was a societal problem to solve. In contrast, industry responders emphasised industry rights, portraying themselves as a responsible industry that is victim to perceived disproportionate policymaking, and values more closely aligned with a market justice approach to public health policy. Our analysis provides detailed insights into the framing strategies used in the policy debate surrounding the non-broadcast advertising of HFSS foods to children. This has relevance as to how advocacy organisations can develop counter-framing to industry frames which seek to limit effective regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Carters-White, Lauren & Chambers, Stephanie & Skivington, Kathryn & Hilton, Shona, 2021. "Whose rights deserve protection? Framing analysis of responses to the 2016 Committee of Advertising Practice consultation on the non-broadcast advertising of foods and soft drinks to children," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:104:y:2021:i:c:s0306919221001184
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919221001184
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102139?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gollust, S.E. & Niederdeppe, J. & Barry, C.L., 2013. "Framing the consequences of childhood obesity to increase public support for obesity prevention policy," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(11), pages 96-102.
    2. Fuchs, Doris & Lederer, Markus ML, 2007. "The Power of Business," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Donald S. Siegel & Donald F. Vitaliano, 2007. "An Empirical Analysis of the Strategic Use of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 773-792, September.
    4. Ann‐Marie Kennedy & Katharine Jones & Janine Williams, 2019. "Children as Vulnerable Consumers in Online Environments," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 1478-1506, December.
    5. Ortiz, Selena E. & Zimmerman, Frederick J. & Adler, Gary J., 2016. "Increasing public support for food-industry related, obesity prevention policies: The role of a taste-engineering frame and contextualized values," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 142-153.
    6. Selda Ulucanlar & Gary J Fooks & Jenny L Hatchard & Anna B Gilmore, 2014. "Representation and Misrepresentation of Scientific Evidence in Contemporary Tobacco Regulation: A Review of Tobacco Industry Submissions to the UK Government Consultation on Standardised Packaging," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Scott, C. & Hawkins, B. & Knai, C., 2017. "Food and beverage product reformulation as a corporate political strategy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 37-45.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Souza Oliveira, Juliana & Cristina Egito de Menezes, Risia & Almendra, Ricardo & Israel Cabral de Lira, Pedro & Barbosa de Aquino, Nathália & Paula de Souza, Nathália & Santana, Paula, 2022. "Unhealthy food environments that promote overweight and food insecurity in a brazilian metropolitan area: A case of a syndemic?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    2. von Kaufmann, Freddie & Skafida, Valeria, 2023. "Captive school markets, industry self-regulation, and public-private partnerships: Narratives shaping the development of alternative proteins in the United States, 1965–1982," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aseem Kaul & Jiao Luo, 2018. "An economic case for CSR: The comparative efficiency of for‐profit firms in meeting consumer demand for social goods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1650-1677, June.
    2. Alberto Galasso & Mihkel Tombak, 2014. "Switching to Green: The Timing of Socially Responsible Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 669-691, September.
    3. Fabien Martinez, 2014. "Corporate strategy and the environment: towards a four-dimensional compatibility model for fostering green management decisions," Post-Print hal-02887618, HAL.
    4. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    5. Wong, Jin Boon & Zhang, Qin, 2022. "Stock market reactions to adverse ESG disclosure via media channels," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    6. Yu Jin Chang & Jae Wook Yoo, 2023. "How Does the Degree of Competition in an Industry Affect a Company’s Environmental Management and Performance?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-11, May.
    7. Fanti, Luciano & Buccella, Domenico, 2018. "A note on the social responsibility in a bilateral monopoly," MPRA Paper 88162, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Zyglidopoulos, Stelios C. & Georgiadis, Andreas P. & Carroll, Craig E. & Siegel, Donald S., 2012. "Does media attention drive corporate social responsibility?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 1622-1627.
    9. Stroope, Samuel & Tom, Joshua C., 2017. "In-Home Firearm Access among US Adolescents and the Role of Religious Subculture: Results from a Nationally Representative Study," SocArXiv kns57, Center for Open Science.
    10. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.
    11. Longinos Marín & Alicia Rubio & Salvador Ruiz de Maya, 2012. "Competitiveness as a Strategic Outcome of Corporate Social Responsibility," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(6), pages 364-376, November.
    12. Staudigel, Matthias & Anders, Sven, 2020. "Effects of the FDA's sodium reduction strategy in the U.S. market for chip products," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 216-238.
    13. Paul Pecorino, 2016. "A Portion of Profits to Charity: Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Profitability," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(2), pages 380-398, October.
    14. Buccella, Domenico & Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca, 2024. "Corporate Social Responsibility: A theory of the firm revisited with environmental issues," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1421, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    15. Kristen L. Walker & Kiya Bodendorf & Tina Kiesler & Georgie de Mattos & Mark Rostom & Amr Elkordy, 2023. "Compulsory technology adoption and adaptation in education: A looming student privacy problem," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 445-478, January.
    16. Görg, Holger & Hanley, Aoife & Hoffmann, Stefan & Seric, Adnan, 2016. "When Do Multinational Companies Consider Corporate Social Responsibility? A Multi-Country Study in Sub-Saharan Africa," KCG Working Papers 1, Kiel Centre for Globalization (KCG).
    17. Ameen Qasem & Shaker Dahan AL-Duais & Wan Nordin Wan-Hussin & Hasan Mohamad Bamahros & Abdulsalam Alquhaif & Murad Thomran, 2022. "Institutional Ownership Types and ESG Reporting: The Case of Saudi Listed Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-23, September.
    18. Markus Kitzmueller, 2008. "Economics and Corporate Social Responsibility," Economics Working Papers ECO2008/37, European University Institute.
    19. Klymak, Margaryta, 2023. "The trade effects of information provision about forced and child labor," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    20. Mark Bagnoli & Susan G. Watts, 2017. "Voluntary Assurance of Voluntary CSR Disclosure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 205-230, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:104:y:2021:i:c:s0306919221001184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.