Research Paper no. Dr Rhonda Jolly. Social Policy Section. January 2. 01. 1Contents. Executive Summary. Childhood obesity has been labelled one of the most serious public health issues of the 2. Overweight and obese children typically grow into overweight and obese adults, who are susceptible to chronic complaints such as diabetes and cardio vascular disease. These diseases place considerable burdens on national health systems and economies. It can be argued therefore that policy which encourages healthy eating habits is desirable. However, the increasing availability of foods high in fat, sugar and salt so called junk foods across the world has made eating healthily a challenge. This challenge, according to some research, is compounded by advertising that adversely influences peoples food preferences and consumption patterns. As a consequence of this research, there has been considerable advocacy which has urged governments to place limitations on the advertising of junk foods, particularly to children. In opposition, other research has supported the argument that junk food can be part of a balanced diet and that it should be the responsibility of individuals, including children, to make decisions about what they consume. This paper considers both sides of this debate. The paper also looks briefly at the policy approaches to junk food in a number of countries and consequent actions taken to control or prohibit the influence of advertising. In particular, the paper notes recent Australian Government approaches to dealing with this issue. The paper concludes that to date, the Australian response to this issue has emphasised the value of a self regulatory regime. However, this approach may be modified in the future, as a result of a number of factors. These include growing public demand for intervention and a shift in health policy more towards preventive health than has been emphasised in the past. Acknowledments The author is grateful for the constructive comments and suggestions made on a previous version of this paper by Ms Kaye Mehta, Senior Lecturer, Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, Flinders University. Thanks also to my colleagues, Dr Matthew Thomas and Paula Pyburne, for their valuable contributions. Introduction. The World Health Organization WHO has labelled childhood obesity as one of the most serious public health challenges of the 2. In 2. 01. 0, according to WHO, there are an estimated 4. In Australia, in 2. Children who are overweight or obese are likely to grow into obese adults who risk developing a number of chronic non communicable ailments, such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease. As these diseases add billions in health costs to national economies, it is clearly desirable both for individuals and for society overall, to devise and introduce policies which prohibit or limit their proliferation. One policy intervention which can help to achieve populations with well adjusted weight levels involves introducing and maintaining strategies that encourage healthy eating habits. But the extensive array of convenience and pre packaged foods high in fat, sugar and salt so called junk foods which are increasingly available across the world, often promoted in large or multiple serving sizes, has made eating healthily a challengefor individuals personally, and for policymakers indirectly. Many have argued that the challenge has been compounded by a bombardment of marketing and advertising that surreptitiously and adversely influences peoples food preferences and consumption patterns. There has been considerable advocacy therefore, as a result of this thinking, which has exhorted governments to place limitations on the marketing of junk foods, particularly to children. This paper considers some of the available evidence relating to the influence of the various forms of advertising in general, their influence on children and on consumption habits. It considers also arguments which maintain that junk food can be part of a balanced diet and that the food, non alcoholic drink and advertising industries can be entrusted to market these types of products responsibly without the intervention of government, or with minimal government intervention. The paper looks briefly at the policy approaches to junk food in a number of countries and consequent actions taken to control or prohibit marketing which may influence childrens eating habits. In particular, the paper notes recent Australian Government approaches to dealing with this issue and the stance taken in favour of advertising regulation by the Australian Greens. The paper concludes that overall, the Australian response has been cautious in relation to calls for more action to deal with obesity and its concomitant health problems. Arguments that the junk food industry voluntarily and responsibly limits the exposure of children to excessively manipulative promotion of its products appear to have been successful in maintaining a largely self regulatory environment in Australia. This is despite the findings of national and international studies that indicate more action may need to be taken, and the imposition of various bans and taxes in other countries. Some change to Australias current approach may occur in the future, however, as a result of a number of factors, such as growing public demand for intervention and a shift in health policy emphasis towards prevention. There is a significant body of academic work which discusses the ways in which advertising influences behaviour. Essentially, this work can be divided into two types of critique. The first group of studies examines advertising at the micro level by considering the ways in which it seeks to persuade or manipulate consumers. The second group of studies takes a societal view in examining ways in which advertising, and the mass media overall, may help to concentrate economic and cultural power in the hands of a few corporations and individuals. In an analysis of studies which have looked at advertising from the persuasivemanipulative perspective, American academics John Harms and Douglas Kellner conclude that it creates meanings for consumers through visual imagery. These meanings in turn, shape consciousness and behaviour subtly by sanctioning some forms of thought and behaviour while de legitimising others. Advertisements in fact place less emphasis on communicating specific product information and more on communicating the social and symbolic uses of products. Effectively, this means that in a consumer oriented society, people define themselves as consumers and they are persuaded that they gain a fundamental gratification from consumption. So advertisers generate systems of meaning, prestige and identity by associating their products with certain life styles, symbolic values and pleasures. What this amounts to is a situation where advertising works to affect purchasing in a variety of subtle ways, as is illustrated in the box below. Subtle effect of advertising. The subtle influence of advertising works in a variety of ways, such as those shown below Promotion of images that do not equate to the truth, but are presented in ways that appear to be truthful. So, people are convinced that buying product A will make them happy or younger or more attractiveit must be so because the advertisements prove it. Guilherme Souza Nucci Manual Direito Penal Militar here. Repetition of messages which stress minor differences between products, for example, Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola, can influence unconscious decisions on what becomes a preferred product. Even if consumers dislike some annoying advertisements, the constant repetition of messages can still influence their purchasing actions. Another perspective on advertising is advanced by renowned media critic, Ben Bagdikian.