The power of pester

Over half of kids aged 3 to 5 researched in the US thought carrots tasted better when given to them in a McDonald's bag.

To view all news items, please visit the news page. Click here »

The power of pester

Posted: 18 August 2007

From The Pulse - Health Matters, www.abc.net.au 9th August 2007

By Peter Lavelle  (abridged article)

Our childhood obesity rate is among the highest in the world. About a quarter of our kids are overweight or obese, and that percentage is increasing year by year.

We also have more junk food ads per hour of television than any other country in the world. Is there a link?

There's a lot of fierce argument going on about this. In one corner of the ring are nutritionists, doctors, and parents. In the other, are food manufacturing, advertising and television companies who claim the link between junk food advertising and obesity hasn’t been conclusively proved.

But that’s not what researchers from the US found in a recent study published last week in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine.

Researchers from Stanford University studied 63 Californian pre-school children aged 3 - 5. They gave these kids hamburgers, french fries (chips), chicken nuggets, milk, and carrots. The food was presented to the kids wrapped in plain wrapping then in McDonald's brand wrapping. Here's what the kids thought:

  • 61 per cent of the kids said milk tasted better in a McDonald's cup;
  • 54 per cent said carrots tasted better in a McDonald's bag;
  • 77 per cent said the french fries tasted better in a McDonald's bag;
  • 59 per cent of the kids said chicken nuggets tasted better in a McDonald's bag.

In other words, they thought the food tasted better if it was associated with the McDonald's brand.

Kids who preferred the McDonalds packaging tended to live in homes with a greater number of television sets than those who said there was no difference.

How does it work?
There can only be one explanation for this, the researchers concluded: kids are influenced by fast food advertising.

Kids below the age of about eight can't tell the difference between truth and advertising. Favourite characters like Shrek and Willy Wonka feature in the ad – along with wacky cartoons, catchy songs, prizes, competitions, and toys. In-store promotions reinforce the message. Mum doesn’t have the energy/time/willpower to resist. The product goes into the trolley.

It's called pester power. The Stanford University study shows just how effective it is. And our children are being bombarded with it.

A 2003 study done by the Divisions of General Practice – representing almost all GPs across Australia – found there was an average of one junk food advertisement per ad break – in some cases up to three advertisements per ad break for different types of junk food – during children's television programs.

About 30 per cent of all ads in kids' viewing time are for food, and over 99 per cent of these are for junk food – hamburgers, pizza, fried chicken, soft drink, ice cream and chocolate.

These foods are high in fat, sugar and/or salt with little nutritional value. But they account for, on average, about 40 per cent of kids' energy intake.

In Australia, a lobby group called the Coalition on Food Advertising to Children (CFAC), wants to put a stop to this. The CFAC includes Nutrition Australia, the Australian Medical Association, the Cancer Council, and the Australian Consumers' Association. It is running a campaign against food advertising on children's television.

It wants food advertising – all food, not just junk food – on TV banned during periods when children aged under 12 years are watching. That is, during early and afternoon slots, and on evening TV between 5 pm and 9 pm.

Squaring off against the CFAC are three of the biggest and most powerful industries in Australia – the food, television and advertising industries. The food industry for example is the third biggest advertiser on television. A ban would potentially cost these industries hundreds of millions of dollars in lost sales annually.

They have powerful lobbyists and public relations consultants who have mounted some very persuasive arguments against restricting advertising. They say:

  • There's no way you can stop kids being exposed to food advertising – if not during the ads, then in actual programming content, in adult time slots, and in other media – pay TV, the internet and mobile phone content;
  • Food advertising is a necessary revenue stream – without ad revenues from food companies, TV channels couldn’t afford to make kids' programming. The kids themselves would lose out;
  • Regulations are already in place; specifically, a voluntary code brought in by the Australian Communications and Media Authority's 'Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice' and 'Children's Television Standards' which require TV stations not to air ads that promote ‘inactive lifestyles’ and ‘unhealthy eating habits’ or 'put undue pressure on children to ask their parents or other people to purchase an advertised product or service.'*