Industry documents ‘reveal the truth about alcohol advertising’

Although the content of alcohol advertisements in the UK is restricted, an analysis of previously unseen industry documents published by the British Medical Journal finds that advertisers are still managing to appeal to young people and promote drinking.

Professor Gerard Hastings and colleagues show that companies are “pushing the boundaries” of the advertising code of practice and warn that the UK system of self regulatory controls for alcohol advertising is failing.

Hastings and his team analysed a sample of internal marketing documents from four alcohol producers and their communications agencies. The documents were made available as part of the House of Commons Health Committee alcohol inquiry and included client briefs, media schedules, advertising budgets, and market research reports.

The alcohol industry spends around £800m (€900m; $1.3bn) a year promoting alcohol in the UK.

The authors looked at four themes that are banned by the advertising code of practice, such as appealing to people under 18 and encouraging irresponsible drinking, as well as sponsorship and new media.

They found that market research data on 15 and 16 year olds is used to guide campaign development and deployment, while many references are made to the need to recruit new drinkers and establish their loyalty to a particular brand. WKD, for instance, wants to attract “new 18 year olds” and Carling takes a particular interest in the fact that the Carling Weekend is “the first choice for the festival virgin.”

Despite a ban on encouraging drunkenness and excess, the authors also found many references to unwise and immoderate drinking, suggesting that increasing consumption is a key promotional aim.

Other documents suggest that brands can promote social success, masculinity or femininity, despite this also being banned under advertising codes. For example, Carling is described as a “social glue” by its promotion team, while the need to “communicate maleness and personality” is noted as a key communications objective for WKD.

Although the codes prohibit any link between alcohol and youth culture or sporting achievement in advertising, the documents discuss in detail sponsorship deals with football, lads’ magazines, and music festivals. The use of new media, including social networking sites, is also a fast growing channel for alcohol advertising, say the authors.

Hastings and his team argue that the UK needs to tighten both the procedures and scope of the regulation of alcohol advertising.

They suggest that regulation should be independent of the alcohol and advertising industries and that all alcohol advertisements should be pre-vetted. And they call for sponsorship to be covered by the regulations, and much greater scrutiny for digital media. Particular efforts should also be made to protect children from alcohol advertising, they say, such as banning billboards and posters near schools and restricting TV, radio and cinema advertisements.

They believe that the current problems with UK alcohol promotion are reminiscent of those seen before tobacco advertising was banned, “when attempts to control content and adjust targeting simply resulted in more cryptic and imaginative campaigns.

“History suggests that alcohol advertisers are, appropriately enough, drinking in the last chance saloon” they conclude.

In reply, David Poley of the alcohol industry’s Portman Group said:

“We are proud of the regulatory system for alcohol in the UK which is admired across the world. Gerard Hastings trawled through thousands of pages of internal company marketing documents on behalf of the Health Committee. He failed to find any evidence of actual malpractice. He therefore resorts to slurs and innuendos. We wish Gerard Hastings would publish his criticisms in an advertisement. The ASA could then rightly ban it for being misleading.”