© 2009 American Public Health Association DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.152918
At the time of the study, Elena O. Lingas, Lori Dorfman, and Eliana Bukofzer were with the Berkeley Media Studies Group, Berkeley, CA. Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Lori Dorfman, Berkeley Media Studies Group, 2140 Shattuck Ave, Suite 804, Berkeley, CA 94704 (e-mail: dorfman{at}bmsg.org).
We assessed the nutritional quality of branded food and beverage products advertised on 28 Web sites popular with children. Of the 77 advertised products for which nutritional information was available, 49 met Institute of Medicine criteria for foods to avoid, 23 met criteria for foods to neither avoid nor encourage, and 5 met criteria for foods to encourage. There is a need for further research on the nature and extent of food and beverage advertising online to aid policymakers as they assess the impact of this marketing on children.
Children and youths often visit Web sites designed especially for them.1,2 The top food and beverage advertisers on children's television have branded Web sites designed to appeal to children,3 and these companies are innovators in the digital marketing ecosystem.4 The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has established that food and beverage marketing encourages children to request and eat foods that are not good for them; therefore, the IOM has recommended a reduction in children's exposure to such marketing.5 Evidence shows that online advertising builds favorable attitudes toward brands, regardless of whether site visitors remember seeing advertisements.6 Yoo exposed undergraduate students to Web banner advertisements and found that students who had been exposed to an advertisement for a brand were more likely to choose that brand in a later test than were those not exposed to the advertisement for that brand.6 To date, only a handful of studies in the United States3,4,7,8 and Australia9 have documented the evolving online food-marketing environment targeting children and youth. Moore3 documented the range and extent of marketing techniques designed to engage children with company brands on food and beverage company Web sites. A 2007 report documented additional modes of targeting children and youth with food and beverage product marketing in the digital ageincluding mobile marketing, branding instant messaging, viral video, and commercializing online communities.4 A content analysis of 10 children's Web sites found that the foods marketed on the sites were not well suited to a healthful diet.7 Weber et al. found that the Web sites of 40 top food and beverage brands used "advergames" and cartoon characters to engage children with their brands.8 The Australian study found similar engagement techniques and references to unhealthful branded foods on popular Australian Web sites targeted toward children.9 In an attempt to provide further information on the food and beverage marketing to which children are exposed online, we examined Web sites popular with children to determine whether the sites contained depictions of branded foods and beverages. We also assessed the nutritional value of any marketed products on these Web sites and evaluated their appropriateness for school-age children.
We purchased a ranking of the top 30 children's Web sites in the United States for October 2006 (the most recent month available when the study commenced) from Hitwise, an online activity tracking company.10 The ranking was ordered by number of visits. Because of the complexity and dynamism of Web sites, our study was exploratory. We did not have multiple coders, which precluded assessment of intercoder reliability. Between July 11, 2007, and August 28, 2007, E. B. examined each of the 30 home pages (and every page 1 click away from each home page) for the presence of advertisements for branded foods or beverages. When we identified a branded product per the methods just described, we assessed the product's nutritional content using the IOM's 2007 standards for "competitive" foods in schools (foods sold outside of school lunch programs).11 These standards provided an evidence-based proxy for what could be considered healthful or unhealthful foods for children and youths, regardless of where the foods were consumed. The IOM has grouped foods into 3 tiers: tier 1 foods are consistent with what the US Department of Health and Human Services' 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) call "foods to encourage"11(p120) and are recommended for all students, tier 2 foods do not meet tier 1 criteria but do not fall outside DGA recommendations for other nutrients and are recommended only for high school students after school hours, and tier 3 foods are all those that are not recommended for any child at any time in school.
Two of the 30 Web sites were unavailable for viewing during the study period. There were 1709 unique pages directly linked (i.e., 1 click away) to the 28 remaining home pages (n = 1737 pages). We found 22 different food and beverage products on 6 of the home pages, and we found 71 additional products one click away from 18 of the home pages, for a total of 93 unique products (Table 1).
We obtained nutrition information on the products either from the product label (25 products) or from the manufacturer's Web site (52 products). We excluded 16 products because of a lack of product specificity or unobtainable nutrition information. Of the remaining 77 products, only 2 (Nestle Juicy Juice Harvest Surprise and Quaker Oats Oatmeal) met the IOM tier 1 criteria11 (Table 2). Three additional products included at least 1 variety that met tier 1 criteria. Another 20 products met tier 2 criteria, and 3 other products had at least 1 variety that met tier 2 criteria. The remaining 49 products fell into tier 3.
The Federal Trade Commission has reported that food and beverage marketing targeting youths in 2006 was dominated by campaigns integrating product promotion across traditional platforms (e.g., television, print) and evolving platforms (e.g., Web, cell phone).12 On Web sites for children alone, there were 2 billion impressions (ads displayed to a site visitor) for foods and beverages in 2006.12 The results of our study point to the likelihood that the food and beverage products advertised on the Web were those children should avoid. Our study had several limitations. Data collection was confined to each Web site's home page and pages that were 1 click away. These criteria yielded more than 1700 Web pages for analysis, but they did not necessarily reflect how a visitor would explore a site nor did they reflect the depth and complexity of the siteslinks may be followed far from the initial entry point. The pages also cannot be assumed to be independent of one another. E. B. collected the data, so we could not assess intercoder reliability. Furthermore, the sites most popular in October 2006 (the most recent month for which site rankings were obtainable) may have been less popular when the data were collected from those sites in July and August 2007, and the products advertised on the sites may have changed between site ranking and data collection. Although we provide only a limited examination of Web sites popular with children, we found the food and beverage products marketed on the sites to be of poor nutritional quality. In 2006, 44 companies spent $1.6 billion marketing foods and beverages to children and youths,12 and the proportion of marketing dollars spent online is predicted to grow.13 Therefore, further research on the extent and nature of food and beverage advertising online is needed to aid policymakers as they assess the impact of this marketing on children.
No protocol approval was necessary because data were obtained from secondary sources.
Peer Reviewed E. O. Lingas developed the study protocols and coding guides, oversaw data collection and analyses, and led the writing of the article. L. Dorfman conceptualized the study and supervised all aspects of its implementation. E. O. Lingas and L. Dorfman interpreted findings and wrote article drafts. E. Bukofzer collected and entered data and conducted the nutrition analysis. Accepted for publication November 11, 2008.
1. Phillips LE. US Online Population . New York, NY: eMarketer; 2008. 2. Roberts DF, Foehr UG, Rideout V. Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8–18 Year-Olds . Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation; 2005. 3. Moore ES. It's Child's Play: Advergaming and the Online Marketing of Food to Children . Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation; 2006. 4. Chester J, Montgomery K. Interactive Food and Beverage Marketing: Targeting Children and Youth in the Digital Age . Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Media Studies Group; 2007. 5. Institute of Medicine. Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity? Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006. 6. Yoo CY. Unconscious processing of Web advertising: effects on implicit memory, attitude toward the brand, and consideration set. J Interact Mark. 2008;22(2):2–16. 7. Alvy LM, Calvert SL. Food marketing on popular children's web sites: a content analysis. J Am Diet Assoc. 2008;108:710–713.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 8. Weber K, Story M, Harnack L. Internet food marketing strategies aimed at children and adolescents: a content analysis of food and beverage brand web sites. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106:1463–1466.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 9. Kelly B, Bochynska K, Kornman K, Chapman K. Internet food marketing on popular children's websites and food product websites in Australia. Public Health Nutr. 2008;11:1180–1187.[Web of Science][Medline] 10. Hitwise Industry Report for LifestyleChildren's Sites: Based on US Internet Usage for the Month of October, 2006. New York, NY: Hitwise; 2006. 11. Institute of Medicine. Nutrition Standards for Foods in Schools: Leading the Way Toward Healthier Youth. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007. 12. Kovacic WE, Harbour PJ, Leibowitz J, Rosch JT. Marketing Food to Children and Adolescents: A Review of Industry Expenditures, Activities, and Self-Regulation: A Report to Congress . Washington, DC: Federal Trade Commission; 2008. 13. Kaplan D. Online ads hit $50 billion by 2011; local reaches $9 billion by 2012; pre-roll, embeds gain in '08. PaidContent.org. Published: January 18, 2008. Available at: http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-us-online-ad-market-to-reach-50-billion-by-2011-report-24-percent-marke. Accessed March 24, 2008.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||