Craig S Ross1, Robert D Brewer2, David H Jernigan3. 1. Fiorente Media, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts. 2. Division of Population Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to outline a method to improve alcohol industry compliance with its self-regulatory advertising placement guidelines on television with the goal of reducing youth exposure to noncompliant advertisements. METHOD: Data were sourced from Nielsen (The Nielsen Company, New York, NY) for all alcohol advertisements on television in the United States for 2005-2012. A "no-buy" list, that is a list of cable television programs and networks to be avoided when purchasing alcohol advertising, was devised using three criteria: avoid placements on programs that were noncompliant in the past (serially noncompliant), avoid placements on networks at times of day when youth make up a high proportion of the audience (high-risk network dayparts), and use a "guardbanded" (or more restrictive) composition guideline when placing ads on low-rated programs (low rated). RESULTS: Youth were exposed to 15.1 billion noncompliant advertising impressions from 2005 to 2012, mostly on cable television. Together, the three no-buy list criteria accounted for 99% of 12.9 billion noncompliant advertising exposures on cable television for youth ages 2-20 years. When we evaluated the no-buy list criteria sequentially and mutually exclusively, serially noncompliant ads accounted for 67% of noncompliant exposure, high-risk network-daypart ads accounted for 26%, and low-rated ads accounted for 7%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the prospective use of the no-buy list criteria when purchasing alcohol advertising could eliminate most noncompliant advertising exposures and could be incorporated into standard post-audit procedures that are widely used by the alcohol industry in assessing exposure to television advertising.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to outline a method to improve alcohol industry compliance with its self-regulatory advertising placement guidelines on television with the goal of reducing youth exposure to noncompliant advertisements. METHOD: Data were sourced from Nielsen (The Nielsen Company, New York, NY) for all alcohol advertisements on television in the United States for 2005-2012. A "no-buy" list, that is a list of cable television programs and networks to be avoided when purchasing alcohol advertising, was devised using three criteria: avoid placements on programs that were noncompliant in the past (serially noncompliant), avoid placements on networks at times of day when youth make up a high proportion of the audience (high-risk network dayparts), and use a "guardbanded" (or more restrictive) composition guideline when placing ads on low-rated programs (low rated). RESULTS: Youth were exposed to 15.1 billion noncompliant advertising impressions from 2005 to 2012, mostly on cable television. Together, the three no-buy list criteria accounted for 99% of 12.9 billion noncompliant advertising exposures on cable television for youth ages 2-20 years. When we evaluated the no-buy list criteria sequentially and mutually exclusively, serially noncompliant ads accounted for 67% of noncompliant exposure, high-risk network-daypart ads accounted for 26%, and low-rated ads accounted for 7%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the prospective use of the no-buy list criteria when purchasing alcohol advertising could eliminate most noncompliant advertising exposures and could be incorporated into standard post-audit procedures that are widely used by the alcohol industry in assessing exposure to television advertising.
Authors: Carla Alexia Campbell; Robert A Hahn; Randy Elder; Robert Brewer; Sajal Chattopadhyay; Jonathan Fielding; Timothy S Naimi; Traci Toomey; Briana Lawrence; Jennifer Cook Middleton Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Craig S Ross; Emily Maple; Michael Siegel; William DeJong; Timothy S Naimi; Joshua Ostroff; Alisa A Padon; Dina L G Borzekowski; David H Jernigan Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Nicole M Bekman; Kristen G Anderson; Ryan S Trim; Jane Metrik; Andrea R Diulio; Mark G Myers; Sandra A Brown Journal: Psychol Addict Behav Date: 2011-09
Authors: Sonya Dal Cin; Keilah A Worth; Meg Gerrard; Mike Stoolmiller; James D Sargent; Thomas A Wills; Frederick X Gibbons Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Laura Kann; Steve Kinchen; Shari L Shanklin; Katherine H Flint; Joseph Kawkins; William A Harris; Richard Lowry; Emily O'Malley Olsen; Tim McManus; David Chyen; Lisa Whittle; Eboni Taylor; Zewditu Demissie; Nancy Brener; Jemekia Thornton; John Moore; Stephanie Zaza Journal: MMWR Suppl Date: 2014-06-13
Authors: Michael Windle; Linda P Spear; Andrew J Fuligni; Adrian Angold; Jane D Brown; Daniel Pine; Greg T Smith; Jay Giedd; Ronald E Dahl Journal: Alcohol Res Health Date: 2009
Authors: Mike Dolan Fliss; Mary E Cox; John W Wallace; Matthew C Simon; Kendall B Knuth; Scott Proescholdbell Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 2.830