An Empirical Evaluation of the US Beer Institute’s Self-Regulation Code Governing the Content of Beer Advertising

摘要

Objectives. We evaluated advertising code violations using the US Beer Institute guidelines for responsible advertising. Methods. We applied the Delphi rating technique to all beer ads (n?=?289) broadcast in national markets between 1999 and 2008 during the National Collegiate Athletic Association basketball tournament games. Fifteen public health professionals completed ratings using quantitative scales measuring the content of alcohol advertisements (e.g., perceived actor age, portrayal of excessive drinking) according to 1997 and 2006 versions of the Beer Institute Code. Results. Depending on the code version, exclusion criteria, and scoring method, expert raters found that between 35% and 74% of the ads had code violations. There were significant differences among producers in the frequency with which ads with violations were broadcast, but not in the proportions of unique ads with violations. Guidelines most likely to be violated included the association of beer drinking with social success and the use of content appealing to persons younger than 21 years. Conclusions. The alcohol industry’s current self-regulatory framework is ineffective at preventing content violations but could be improved by the use of new rating procedures designed to better detect content code violations. From a public health perspective, alcohol advertising should not be directed at vulnerable groups, nor should it portray excessive drinking or other objectionable content such as illegal activity. This position, reflected in both statutory and voluntary regulations of alcohol marketing, is consistent with social learning theory 1 as well as empirical research showing that young people exposed to alcohol marketing initiate drinking at an earlier age and progress more rapidly to heavy drinking. 2,3 To avoid partial or total bans on alcohol marketing through statutory regulation, alcohol industry groups have developed self-regulation guidelines that describe which types of content (and exposure markets) they will exclude voluntarily. In recent years, self-regulation codes have come under increasing scrutiny for several reasons. First, it is alleged that the sections of the codes governing acceptable content are ambiguous and difficult to interpret. 4,5 Second, the sections governing exposure markets may not prevent large numbers of young people, the primary vulnerable group the codes are designed to protect, from being exposed to alcohol marketing. 6 Third, the complaint and adjudication process used to determine whether a particular ad has violated the code is considered inefficient and possibly biased in favor of industry interests. 4,7 These criticisms of the voluntary self-regulation process have been supported by studies in Canada, 8 Ireland, 9 and other countries. In an extensive review of alcohol marketing in 24 nations of the European Union, the ELSA Project 10 concluded that national regulations are not effective in protecting young people, with evidence of many marketing practices breaching the code. Several studies have used expert raters to evaluate the content of alcohol advertisements. Donovan et al . 11 rated alcohol ads obtained from magazines considered to be popular with young people. Two thirds of the magazines had alcohol ads or promotions, and many of the ads were judged to have code violations according to guidelines set by the Australian Alcoholic Beverages Advertising Code. The guidelines most likely to be violated were “strong appeal to children/teens,” actors “not clearly over age 25,” and content “promoting positive social, sexual, and psychological expectancies of consumption.” In a related study, Jones and Donovan 12 compared the judgments of the Australian Advertising Standards Board (ASB), an industry group that adjudicates complaints about alcohol advertisements, with the evaluations provided by 8 marketing experts and 35 advertising students. The experts found that 7 of the 9 ads contained a violation (breach of a clause) of at least 1 of 2 advertising codes. Most of the students (≥?60%) found that all 9 ads contained a violation of at least 1 clause. None of the ads were judged to have a violation by the ASB. It was concluded that the ASB reviewers lacked objectivity or expertise, and that the self-regulation process was not effective. Although suggestive, these rating studies have limitations because they employed qualitative and unstandardized procedures to determine ad violations. Other research, however, has reported similar findings using standardized procedures to obtain violation ratings from experts or from members of the vulnerable population (e.g., youths). Vendrame et al. 13 evaluated perceived violations in the Brazilian alcohol marketing self-regulation code, using 5 ads designated by school children as being the most appealing to them. The ads were viewed by Brazilian high school students, whose ratings indicated that all of the ads violated sections of the code. Given the limitatio