Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window



Related issue outlines:
2004/22: should food advertisements be banned during children's television programs?
Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).
Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis
Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click this icon ...

... to search the Echo newspaper index and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
obesity
exercise

Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald
2009/13: Should the Australian government impose restrictions on fast food advertising to protect children?<BR>

2009/13: Should the Australian government impose restrictions on fast food advertising to protect children?

What they said...
'Our children should be protected from the unfettered bombardment of junk food advertising in their everyday life'
Jane Martin, a senior policy adviser for the Australian Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance

'Self-regulation may prove successful through the reduction of advertisements for unhealthy food products on television during children's prime viewing times'
The Federal House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health and Ageing

The issue at a glance
On Monday June 1, 2009, the Federal House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health and Ageing tabled its report into obesity in Australia titled 'Weighing it up: Obesity in Australia'.

The report made twenty recommendations some of which refer to fast food advertising, labelling and the composition of fast foods.

The report recommended that the effects of fast food advertising should be further investigated, that labelling of food products should be revamped. It also recommended that fast food quality and composition and the promotion of fast food to children should remain a matter for self-regulation by the fast food industry.

A number of medical authorities, consumer choice and public health groups have criticised the report for its failure to recommend decisive action.

Background
Tackling obesity in Australia
A House of Representatives report, 'Weighing It Up: Obesity in Australia', made twenty recommendations designed to help reduce the problem of obesity in Australia. Three of these are printed below.

* The Committee recommended that the Minister for Health and Ageing commission research into the effect of the advertising of food products with limited nutritional value on the eating behaviour of children and other vulnerable groups.
* The Committee recommended that the Federal Government ... create a set of standard guidelines to ensure that food labels provide consistent nutritional information...
* Regarding the content and the promotion of fast food the Committee recommended that the Minister for Health and Ageing adopt a phased approach regarding regulations on the reformulation of food products and the control of fast food advertising. Industry should be encouraged to make changes through self-regulation but if industry fails to make concrete changes within a reasonable time-frame the Federal Government should consider regulations.

Regulation of fast food advertising in other countries
The following overview is drawn substantially from Wikipedia's entry on 'Fast food advertising'. The full text of this entry can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_food_advertising

One of the main areas of regulation facing fast food companies is the advertising of 'junk food' to children.
In the United Kingdom, the Children's Food Bill is intended to highly regulate the advertising of such food aimed at children. Talks between the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and the fast food companies were begun to improve children's diets, though Burger King withdrew from the discussions.
In June 2006, the FSA called for laws to prevent such food from being advertised on television before 9pm. They also called for the disassociation of television and film characters from fast food and stopping celebrities from appearing in such advertisements.
In November 2006, the British Office of Communications (Ofcom) announced that it would ban television advertisements for junk food before, during and after television programing aimed at under-16s in the United Kingdom.
This move has been criticised on both ends of the scale; while the Food and Drink Federation labelled the ban 'over the top', others have said the restrictions do not go far enough (particularly due to the fact that soap operas would be exempt from the ban).
On 1 April 2007, junk food advertisements were banned from programs aimed at four to nine-year-olds. Such advertisements broadcast during programmes 'aimed at, or which would appeal to,' ten to fifteen-year-olds will continue to be phased out over the coming months, with a full ban coming into effect on 1 January 2009.
In Sweden all advertising aimed at the under-12s is banned, including fast food advertisements.
On 3 June 2004 KFC withdrew American television commercials after reaching a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission.
Faced with stricter television, radio and print regulation, many fast food companies have started making use of Internet advertising to reach their customers.
The accuracy of the images of food used by the fast food companies is regularly called into question. The actual product is often described as being of poorer quality to that represented in the image.

Internet information
On Monday June 1, 2009, the Federal House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health and Ageing tabled its report into obesity in Australia titled 'Weighing it up: Obesity in Australia'.
The full text of the Committee's report can be found at
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/haa/obesity/report.htm

The consumer information and advocacy group Choice has conducted a long-term campaign to have fast food advertising to children banned. The section of the Choice Internet site dealing with this issue can be found at http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=105388&catId=100384&tid=100008
Choice has set up a page of links to discussions of further aspects of the issue. This page of links can be found at http://search.choice.com.au/consumer/Fast%20Food%20Advertising

A briefing paper presenting a detailed case against fast food advertising in Australia can be found at http://www.choice.com.au/files/f132260.pdf
The case is clearly laid out and includes a variety of additional sources. It has been prepared by the Coalition on Food Advertising to Children (CFAC) which includes Choice.

On June 26, 2009, the ABC carried a news report detailing a voluntary agreement reached by the seven major suppliers of fast food in Australia which would put limitations on how these products were marketed to children. The report includes the reservations of a number of health and consumer groups who are said to be sceptical about the agreement. The full text of the news report can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/26/2609922.htm
Another account of the agreement reached by the seven major fast food companies can be found at
http://www.bandt.com.au/news/95/0C061E95.asp

On July 1, 2009, the Australian Association of National Advertisers announced that the seven major suppliers of fast food in Australia would restrict their advertising to the promotion of products that were nutritionally sound according to an agreed set of criteria. These criteria can be found at http://www.aana.com.au/documents/NutritionCriteriaforAssessingChildrensMeals.pdf
A report detailing this agreement can be found on the Diabetes Australia website at http://www.diabetesnsw.com.au/news_pages/fastfood.asp

On February 9, 2008, the ABC broadcast a report detailing the South Australian government's plans to ban fast food advertising during children's television viewing times. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/09/2158517.htm?section=australia

Arguments in favour of the government imposing restrictions on fast food advertising
1. Childhood obesity is a major problem in Australia
Childhood obesity is a major health issue in Australia. The Coalition on Food Advertising to Children has claimed, 'The prevalence of children who are overweight or obese in Australia is now amongst the highest in the world and is rapidly increasing.1 From 1985 to 1995, the prevalence of overweight and obesity in Australian children virtually doubled, from about 10% to about 20%.1 Currently, the prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity is estimated to be 25-30%. This rate of increase amounts to approximately 40 000 more children each year becoming overweight or obese.'
Looking specifically at obesity and considering the most recent figures for children, it appears that nearly 8 per cent of children in Australia are obese, up from 5 per cent in 1995.
Among adults, recent data shows 68 per cent of men and 55 per cent of women are obese or overweight. Access Economics calculated that the cost of obesity in 2008 reached $58.2 billion.
The Coalition on Food Advertising to Children has detailed a range of health and social problems which it claims are associated with being overweight or obese.
Psycho-social problems associated with weight issues are said to include social isolation and discrimination, poor self-esteem and depression, learning difficulties, and longer term poorer social and economic outcomes.1
Physical and medical risks in childhood are said to include orthopedic problems (back pain, flat feet, slipped growth plates in hips, knock knees), fatty liver, type 2 diabetes, menstrual problems, asthma and obstructive sleep apnea.
Long-term disease risks in adulthood are said to include type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, hypertension, some types of cancer, musculoskeletal disorders and gall bladder disease.
Reduced life expectancy and increased mortality in later life may make this the first generation to
have a shorter life expectancy than their parents.

2. Self-regulation of fast food advertising is not working
The Obesity Policy Coalition, which includes Vocally and Cancer Council Victoria, has stated that self-regulation of fast food advertising has failed over many years.
The Australian Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance, which includes health groups concerned with diabetes, kidney disease and stroke, has adopted the same position. The Alliance chairman Professor Ian Olver has stated, '.I would have liked to see a stronger stance on restricting advertising of unhealthy foods to kids that recognises the limitations of industry self-regulation.'
Jane Martin, a senior policy adviser for the Alliance, has stated, 'If any inroads are to be made in the area of obesity, government needs to start making some tough policy decisions and stop sitting on its hands. This is a feather-duster approach to prevention, touching several things lightly but not disturbing the status quo and the real drivers of obesity.'
Ms Martin added, 'We have had self-regulation for decades while Australians' waistlines continue to expand. Our children should be protected from the unfettered bombardment of junk food advertising in their everyday life.'
South Australia's Flinders University Nutrition Department spokeswoman Kay Mehta, says children are especially susceptible to advertising and should be protected.
Ms Metha has stated, 'It is the government's role to protect the health and well-being of the communities they are elected to serve, and to protect the interests of the vulnerable. Really children are vulnerable to advertising.'
A similar point has been made by the Coalition on Food Advertising to Children. The Coalition claims, 'Children are a na‹ve and vulnerable audience, who do not fully comprehend the purpose of advertising and marketing. Society has a responsibility to protect children from undue commercial influences.'

3. Parents need support to help regulate their children's eating habits
It has been claimed that the nature and extent of fast food advertising makes it very difficult for parents to regulate their children's consumption of these products.
The Coalition on Food Advertising to Children notes, 'Advertising increases children's requests for advertised products ('Pester Power') and undermines parents' attempts to provide a healthy diet for their children.' The Coalition also notes, 'The causes and solutions of childhood obesity are multi-factorial. The overwhelming weight of the evidence suggests strong causal links between food
promotions and children's food preferences, household purchases, and children's food consumption patterns.'
The Coalition further notes, 'Children 4 to 12 years old are conservatively estimated to directly influence $94.9 billion on parental food and beverage purchases in the US, and spend the greatest proportion of their own income ($3.19 billion) on food and beverages. In Australia, 73% of 5 to 12 year olds influence the purchase of household grocery items.'
The consumer lobby group, Choice, has claimed that government regulation of fast food advertisements directed at children is necessary if parents are to be able to properly control their children's eating habits. Choice also claims that a number of surveys conducted by the lobby group indicate that parents are seeking this level of support from governments.
Choice makes the following claims on its Internet site, 'Ultimately, parents are responsible for what children eat at home and what they send to school in their lunchboxes. Parents are also responsible for ensuring that kids have a healthy start to life by helping them to develop good eating habits. But food marketing makes parents' jobs that much harder by tempting children with salty, fatty or sugary foods which they inevitably pester their parents to buy.
In 2006, a Choice-commissioned Newspoll survey showed that 89% of respondents were in favour of restricting advertising of unhealthy foods during TV programs that are popular with children.
In 2008, our Newspoll survey found that 88% of parents think that junk food marketing undermines their efforts to encourage their children to eat healthy.'
On June 8, 2009, a survey was released of 800 Australian parents. The survey, conducted by the Cancer Council found 91 per cent were sick of the tactics used by food marketers and want better regulation. More than half want the Government to bring in a total ban on such advertising.

4. The fast food industry is seeking to avoid external regulation
It has been claimed that the fast food industry is specifically opposed to the regulation of its advertisements because children represent a lucrative portion of its market and one in which they have invested enormous amounts of advertising revenue.
The Coalition on Food Advertising to Children notes, 'Children and youth represent a primary focus of food and beverage marketing initiatives. Food companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing and advertising, in order to maintain and increase market share. In recent decades there has been a marked increase in spending on food marketing. For example, McDonalds expenditure on media advertising in Australia increased from $6 million in 1983-84 to $50-55 million in 2005.'
In Australia, nutritionists and public health officials have described a pledge by fast-food companies to market only healthier products to children as deceptive and as an attempt by these companies to avoid government regulation.
Nutritionist Rosemary Stanton said the "holes in this 'new' code were big enough to drive a truck through". She pointed to the fact that the code would not cover sports sponsorship outside the school setting, and the fact that it applied only to children's programs.
The new rules would not prevent marketing junk food in programs popular with children such as Home and Away and The Simpsons, as long as the advertisement did not appeal directly to children.

5. The fast food industry is specifically targeting children
Critics of the fast food industry and its capacity for self regulation note that the industry specifically targets children. They claim both that the industry promotes its products using child-specific incentives like toys. They also claim that the industry concentrates its television commercials during children's peak viewing periods.
The Obesity Policy Coalition, which includes VicHealth, Cancer Council Victoria and Diabetes Australia, opposes the persuasive marketing tactics that it claims the fast food industry is using to encourage children to eat their products.
The Coalition is proposing that any food product which does not meet government -approved nutrition standards should not be marketed to children using free toys, competitions or celebrity-endorsed promotions.
Jane Martin, the Obesity Coalition's senior policy adviser has stated, 'We need to produce a level playing field where all those who produce junk food are not allowed to market to kids in this way. It is all very well to talk about trying to increase physical activity in schools, but we really have to look at other ways that are creating demand for foods for children which are not healthy to be eating.'
The consumer lobby group, Choice, makes a number of claims on its Internet page, set up as part of a campaign to have the advertising of fast foods to children regulated. Choice is concerned at the manner in which fast foods seek to link their product to items of high interest to children. The lobby group notes, 'Supermarket shelves carry a range of products featuring kids' favourite characters like Nemo, Bratz and Barbie. At the movies, in magazines or online - games, toys, celebrities and popular cartoon characters are used to promote an array of sugary and high-fat snacks. On the sporting field, sponsorship deals mean the logos of fast-food companies are emblazoned on children's chests as they sprint towards the finish line.
Other common marketing techniques include: Competitions to win a holiday, bike or MP3 player; collecting product tokens to redeem a prize; fast food meal deals where you need to visit the outlet every week to collect the entire set of toys; the use of children's cartoon characters, media personalities and sporting heroes to promote foods to kids; sponsorship of school sports; the use of junk foods in fund-raising.'
Choice is also concerned about the manner in which fast food companies saturate prime children television viewing time slots with their commercials. The lobby group claims, ' Current regulation does not protect children from being bombarded with ads for junk food.
Around 54% of TV food ads aired between 6am and 9pm are for unhealthy foods. The volume of unhealthy food ads increases when children are most likely to be viewing - early evening and Saturday mornings.
As the Coalition on Food Advertising to Children reports: One in three television advertisements during children's viewing times in Australia are for food. Of those, studies repeatedly find that between 55 - 81 % are for foods high in fat and/or high in sugar. For example, in May 2007 the NSW Centre for Overweight and Obesity found there were 10 ads per hour for high fat and /or sugary foods during peak children's viewing times on Sydney commercial television, up from nine per hour in 2006.'

Arguments against the government imposing restrictions on fast food advertising
1. The extent of the childhood obesity problem in Australia has been exaggerated.
It has been claimed that Australia's childhood obesity epidemic has been exaggerated and is only increasing in lower-income families. These claims are said to be supported by recent research findings.
The findings are based on measurements taken from thousands of Australian children in 2000 and 2006 in two nationally representative samples. They found that the growth in childhood obesity overall has slowed to a crawl and the only statistically significant increases are now among boys and girls from low-income homes.
The findings are based on two studies using nationally representative samples, one conducted in 2000 and based on 4500 primary and high school children, and a further study of 6000 children in 2006.
The overall obesity rate rose only slightly from 6.0 per cent in 2000 to 6.8 per cent in 2006. Researchers said the increase was not statistically significant.
Jenny O'Dea, associate professor of child health research at the University of Sydney, stated there is 'no doubt that it (childhood obesity) has been exaggerated.'
Professor O'Dea said there had been an assumption that all of our children are at risk of obesity and ill-health. This latest data shows that's not really true - there's something protective about high income and middle income, and the real risk has been in low-income children,' Professor O'Dea said. 'They (other experts) have to look at the evidence, and they are refusing to do it.'
The head of at least one school in an affluent part of inner-eastern Sydney yesterday agreed the obesity problem was neither as ubiquitous nor as uniform as sometimes supposed. Gabrielle McAnespie, principal of St Charles's Primary School in Waverley, has stated, 'This is my 28th year in teaching, and over that period of time I can't say I have noticed an increase (in childhood obesity).'
Jan Wright, director of the Child and Youth Interdisciplinary Research Centre at the University of Wollongong, agreed the problem had been exaggerated and dramatised, and said prevention programs needed to focus on improving neighbourhoods with poor facilities, rather than blaming individuals.
A recent United States study found there had been 'no significant increase' in the prevalence of obesity in American children and teenagers from 1999 to 2006, contrary to figures from prior years. The study, published in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, found obesity rates varied by racial group, being higher for non-Hispanic black and Mexican- American girls than for non-Hispanic white girls.

2. Childhood obesity is a complex problem and is caused by factors other than consumption of fast foods
It has been claimed that the problem of being overweight or obese among children stems from a wide range of causes and cannot simply be attributed to an increased consumption of fast food.
The causes of being overweight in childhood are mixed.
The Children, Youth and Women's Health Service claims, 'Part of the cause is due to what the child inherits. The way the body controls energy, uses up fats and feels hungry is different for different people. Some different cultural groups are more likely to be overweight.'
The Service further claims, 'Part of the cause is also in the way children live and what they do. They are more likely to be overweight if they do not get much exercise... Television watching is related to overweight problems because children don't use much body energy when they are watching
they often watch instead of more active play they are likely to have snacks while watching '
There is very easy access to 'energy dense' foods; foods that are high in fats and sugars.
Though it is acknowledge that an increased consumption of high energy-yielding foods, such as fast foods, contributes to the problem it is not the total cause. This involves considering both when and how children eat as well as what they eat.
The Children, Youth and Women's Health Service has further stated, 'Dietary habits that contribute to obesity include often having fast food and large volumes of sweetened beverages such as soft drinks -eating salty foods leads to a child being more thirsty and drinking more, especially more sugar containing soft drinks; eating large portions; skipping breakfast; low intake of fruits and vegetables and irregular meal frequency and snacking patterns,'
Television watching is related to overweight problems because
children don't use much body energy when they are watching
According to statements such as these, though fast foods in significant quantities are not desirable, they are only part of the problem. Defenders of fast food advertising argue that in the face of the complex causal patterns outlined above, targeting fast food advertising is simplistic.

3. Self-regulation of advertising in the fast food industry is already being made more rigorous
A recent voluntary agreement reached among a group of major fast food producers is intended to minimise the promotion of potentially harmful products to children.
In June, 2009, seven companies signed up to the Australian Quick Service Restaurant Industry Initiative for Responsible Advertising and Marketing to Children, modelled on the Australian Food and Grocery Council (AFGC)'s Responsible Children's Marketing Initiative, which came into effect on January 1 this year. The companies - McDonald's, KFC, Pizza Hut, Hungry Jack's, Oporto, Red Rooster and Chicken Treat - have also committed to adopt on-pack nutrition labelling and to display nutritional information clearly on the their websites.
Sixteen leading food and beverage manufacturers have already signed up to AFGC's initiative - including Nestle Australia, Coca Cola, Pepsico Australia, Sanitarium and Campbell Arnott's - with the companies pledging to not advertise to children aged 12 and under, unless they are promoting healthy dietary choices and a healthy lifestyle consistent with scientific standards. The fast-food firms have made a similar commitment, with only healthier choices to be promoted to children under 14.
The latest initiative, which was developed in collaboration with the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA), will also provide a transparent process for monitoring and reviewing communications activities. All consumer advertising complaints to do with breeches of the new initiative will be lodged with the Advertising Standards Bureau.
Scott McClellan, CEO of the AANA, has claimed,'An independent third part will also act as a monitor and will be conducting regular reviews to ensue all participating companies are complying with the commitments made in their action plans.'
Participating companies have also said they will work harder to ensure nutrition information is readily available for consumers on their websites and on packaging.
It is also noted that food advertising in Australia is already substantially regulated.
there are already regulations, in the form of codes of practice, which apply to advertising. The regulations currently in existence include the AANA Code of Ethics; the Advertising to Children Code; the Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code; and the Weight Management Code of Practice.

4. If self-regulation of fast food advertising does not work, the government will intervene
Defenders of the Australian Government's current decision to allow fast food companies to self-regulate their advertising have argued that self-regulation will only be allowed to continue so long as it is seen to work.
The House of Representatives inquiry into obesity was chaired by Labor MP Steve Georganas, who has claimed, 'The Government is committed to tackling the obesity problem and will do whatever it takes.'
The report, 'Weighing It Up: Obesity in Australia', states, 'The Committee notes community concerns about the lack of regulation of advertising to children, and supports the argument that marketing of unhealthy products to children should be restricted and/or decreased.
However, the Committee favours a phased approach and thinks that self-regulation may prove successful through the reduction of advertisements for unhealthy food products on television during children's prime viewing times.
But, consistent with a phased approach and industry's own recognition of the limitations of self-regulation, should self-regulation not result in a decrease in the number of unhealthy food advertisements directed at children, the Committee supports the Federal Government considering more stringent regulations on the advertising of unhealthy food products directed at children.'

5. Ultimately, parents are responsible for regulating what their children eat
A number of studies have indicated that parents have a major role to play in effecting their children's body weight, however, it appears that this is not simply whether they agree to supply their children with fast food or not. Critics of fast food advertising maintain that it undermines parents who may then given way to their children's ad-prompted demands for fast food. Others claim, however, that the parents' own exercise and eating behaviours and their awareness of weight as a health issue are both more important.
It has been claimed that parents may have a determining influence on their children's eating and exercising behaviours and therefore on whether their children will have weight issues.
Relatedly it has been claimed overweight parents are more likely to have over-weight children. Some of the reason for this may be genetic; however, it is more likely to be behavioural.
A family's eating patterns can have a major influence on whether children maintain a healthy weight. Some overweight parents may be less concerned about their children also being overweight than parents who have a healthy weight.
A study released in 2006 also suggests that the amount and quality of time parents spend with their children affects whether those children will become overweight or obese. The study was conducted by researchers at Texas A&M University. The five year study found that the more time a mother spends with her child, the less likely that child is to be obese.
It has further been claimed that the parents of overweight children appear to be either less aware of or concerned about the health implications of obesity.
A recent British study concluded, 'Most parents of overweight and obese children did not report poor health or well-being, and a high proportion did not report concern.' This suggests that many parents of at-risk children with weight issues do not perceive their children as having a potentially life-threatening condition. The British study concluded, 'This has implications for the early identification of such children and the success of prevention and intervention efforts.'
Thus, it has been claimed, rather than heavily regulating fast food advertising, it may be more important to educate parents about the dangers of childhood obesity and how to address this problem. The third recommendation of the report 'Weighing It Up: Obesity in Australia' states, 'The Committee recommends that the Minister for Health and Ageing work with state, territory and local governments through the Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council to develop and implement long-term, effective, well-targeted social marketing and education campaigns about obesity and healthy lifestyles, and ensure that these marketing campaigns are made more successful by linking them to broader policy responses to obesity.'

Further implications
It would appear that the federal government is reluctant to take legislative action in an attempt to regulate the advertising of fast food to children. Part of this reluctance may be because it doubts the impact of fast food advertising in shaping the behaviour of children and their parents. One of the recommendations of the 'Weighing It Up: Obesity in Australia' report is that there be an investigation into the effect of fast food advertising on the eating behaviour of children and other vulnerable groups.

The 'Weighing It Up: Obesity in Australia' report also recommends using a social advertising campaign to help educate the public about the dangers of obesity and fast food consumption. It refers to the effectiveness of campaigns such as the anti smoking Quit campaign and the anti drink driving campaigns. Despite this the report clearly has reservations about the probable effectiveness of any education campaign aimed at reducing obesity and the consumption of fast food. Whether these reservations stem from a lack of faith in advertising per se or from the belief that government-funded advertising would be unable to compete with corporate fast food advertising is not made clear.

It will be interesting to see what results the investigation into the impact of fast food advertising yields. If fast food advertising is shown to have a significant negative effect on the eating habits of children and others then there will be a clear incentive for the government to regulate it directly. Also of interest will be the extent to which self-regulation succeeds. The 'Weighing It Up: Obesity in Australia' report supports fast food industry self-regulation of both the advertising of their products and the improvement of the quality of their products. Again, if this is also shown to be ineffective then again there will be an incentive for government regulation.

When in opposition, the current government was highly critical of their predecessors' failure to adequately regulate fast food advertising. They accused the former government of being under the financial influence of the multinational fast food companies. The Rudd government is now showing a similar reluctance to regulate the fast food industry. There are those who have suggested that they too are being influenced by these extremely powerful corporations.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
AUST, June 3, page 15, editorial, `Fatuous and flabby'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25578253-25209,00.html

AUST, June 3, page 14, comment by Dick Telford, `A fat lot of good this research does'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25577938-5013479,00.html

AGE, June 3, page 7, news item by Ari Sharp, `Anger at lack of action on obesity'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/anger-at-lack-of-action-on-obesity-20090602-buck.html

AGE, June 3, page 14 editorial, `Fat chance that report will change food ads'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/fat-chance-that-report-will-change-food-ads-20090602-bua3.html

AUST, June 2, page 3, news item by Siobhain Ryan, `Shape up, Canberra tells food industry'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25572849-2702,00.html?from=public_rss

AGE, June 2, page 3, news item by Ari Sharp, `Last chance to cut back on children's junk food ads'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/last-chance-to-cut-back-on-childrens-junk-food-ads-20090601-bt0a.html

AGE, May 31, page 5, news item (contains statistics) by Julian Lee, `Boom time for burgers - and diet products'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/boom-time-for-burgers--and-diet-products-20090530-br43.html

AGE, June 11, page 17, comment by Patricia Edgar, `Web opens new front in old battle'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/web-opens-new-front-in-old-battle-20090610-c3l4.html

AGE, June 9, page 4, news item by Daniella Miletic, `Health groups want ban on junk-food marketing ploys'. (photo in online version)
http://www.theage.com.au/national/health-groups-want-ban-on-junkfood-marketing-ploys-20090608-c0ut.html

AUST, June 17, page 3, news item (with survey statistics) by Lunn and Velszadeh, `Eat-your-greens fight a lost cause'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25648340-23289,00.html

H/SUN, June 26, page 13, news item, `Ad code for fast foods'.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25691309-662,00.html

AUST, June 26, page 3, news item by Lara Sinclair, `Maccas agrees to rein in kids' ads'.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25691958-2702,00.html

AGE, June 26, page 3, news item by Julian Lee, `Fast food marketing pledge called spin'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/fast-food-marketing-pledge-called-spin-20090625-cy8p.html

H/SUN, July 6, page 4, news item by Grant McArthur, `Young eat way to ill health'.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25737493-662,00.html

AGE, July 6, page 11, comment by Doug Hendrie, `How the power of peer pressure can make us healthier'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/how-peer-pressure-can-make-us-healthier-20090705-d97m.html

AGE, July 6, page 3, news item (contains statistics) by N Miller, `Obesity plague "no myth"'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/obesity-plague-no-myth-20090705-d973.html

AGE, July 5, page 17, comment by Chris Berg, `Silly recommendations are very bad for our health'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/silly-recommendations-are-very-bad-for-our-health-20090704-d8gd.html

AGE, July 3, page 13, comment (ref to advertising on TV, television programs for children and effects on habits, incl diet) by Patricia Edgar, `Children are not just little consumers'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/children-are-not-just-little-consumers-20090702-d6fn.html?page=-1