Key points:

• The OMA has launched a new policy that restricts the advertising of discretionary food and drink products on Out of Home signs within a 150-metre sightline of a school
• $3 million of advertising space across Australia every year donated to feature targeted advertising campaigns supporting a healthy diet and lifestyle choices.
• The AANA has confirmed a review of its Food & Beverage advertising code - with an outcome expected to be reached later this year
• Anonymous industry sources claim there will be changes made to the policy, with consultations with brands, public interest groups, media owners and other regulators to begin in the coming months.
• The new OMA policy mirrors moves made by international bodies such as Transport for London (TfL) to ban junk food advertising across its rail network. Last month marked a year since the policy came into effect, but not all are sold.
• In Malaysia, there have been further calls to ban junk food advertising on TV before 9pm to complement the nation's recently imposed "sugar tax".

According to OMA CEO, Charmaine Moldrich, what started off with banning alcohol advertising 13 years ago, has evolved into a wellbeing policy that now covers all products that are illegal to market toward children, including gambling and adult products.

She says the industry body has worked continuously to capture "a gamut" of issues that affect children and understands the role that outdoor advertising must play in ensuring these are not amplified by the industry.

"The reason for this policy stems from our board being very aware that we're in the public space and that we broadcast to a general audience, 24/7, and we need to have a heightened awareness, [more so] than other media channels that can be switched on and switched off," Moldrich told Mi3.

"This is always part of our conversation: what is the right thing to do by the community that we broadcast to." 

In Australia, the food category is currently the sixth highest spender on outdoor advertising, contributing $55.2 million and taking a 22% share, according to the latest OMA annual report.

When it comes to the top 10 advertisers in OOH, McDonald's is the second biggest, spending $14.1m in 2018 and has a 21% share, while Mondelez International came in at number nine, spending $9.9m in the space and taking a 44% share.

A complex issue

Moldrich says the move by the body isn't driven by marketers and advertisers, but is motivated by a need to address corporate responsibility.

During the consultation process she says the OMA received no negative feedback from marketers or brands. She claims many praised the organisation's leadership on the matter.

"Discretionary food is really fine for us to eat. It's not blaming or shaming or saying something is bad and something is good. This policy is trying to encourage healthy eating habits and lifestyle. It's saying discretionary food is fine to eat - but it's not part of what you need to eat to have a healthy diet," Moldrich says.

"We've taken a slightly different take on it. We're not being punitive. We're not telling people what to do. We aren't demonising food. There's a lot of that in the community. What we're trying to do is just say look, there is an issue with obesity. Childhood obesity is particularly high in Australia."

Moldrich says the move is also about ensuring that there is further education around the matter, particularly in disadvantaged or vulnerable communities, where the problem is most prevalent.

"There's a stat from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare that says that 35% of children living in the most disadvantaged areas are overweight or obese compared with 23% of those from more advantaged areas," Moldrich says. "The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre has shown that healthy diet is already unaffordable for low income families, costing up to 31% of their disposable income. So, you can see there is an issue that needs to be addressed."

A local and global trend

There is an ongoing global and local trend towards curbing the level of junk food advertising appearing near or targeted towards children.

Early last year the Queensland Government outlined its intentions to ban junk food promotions at government-owned sites. Ads will be phased out across its 2000 outdoor advertising spaces, which included bus stops, train stations and road corridors.

In New South Wales, the government has been under pressure from the Cancer Council, which last year released a study, Junk Food Marketing Exposure on the School Run, which sampled 21 school areas in Sydney and found 72% of food ads on buses were for junk food and just 11% of outdoor ads children were exposed to were classified as healthy.

The Victorian Government has also been dealing with calls from the Obesity Policy Coalition, which argues that advertising also needs to be banned across its state-owned property, with a heightened focus on advertising in major train stations across Melbourne.

In August last year, researchers for the coalition found more than 70 unhealthy food ads plastered across Flinders Street Station, compared with 27 ads for healthy food, a trend that continued at other major stations including Dandenong, Frankston and Camberwell stations.

"Would I like other people to follow us? Of course, I would, but it's also something that the government needs to take a leadership role on. This is a very contested issue in the public space," Moldrich says.

"When I talk about a leadership position, what I'm talking about is putting our money where our mouth is and doing something about an issue in the community."

Outside of Australia, Transport for London opted to ban all junk food advertising across its rail network, following public cries and research surrounding the impact it was having on childhood obesity.

However, not all are sold on the changes. Business strategist and democratic policy writer Saqib Qureshi recently penned an opinion piece on the matter, calling for more research into the exact impact this move has had on childhood obesity.

He says without a deeper understanding of the problem, knee-jerk reactions will only cost governments and consumers more money in tax dollars, adding that the London ban cost the local government body an estimated £25m a year in lost advertising revenue.

AANA codes under examination

The OMA isn't the only self-regulated industry body looking to take a different approach to food and drink advertising. The AANA has confirmed it is reviewing its stance on how these products can be advertised in Australia, with greater changes expected to be made.

According to the AANA, the object of the code is to ensure that advertisers and marketers develop and maintain a high sense of social responsibility in advertising and marketing food and beverage products in Australia.

Some in industry believe the review will take place over the coming months, with advertisers, agencies, owners and regulatory bodies all being approached to gain a greater understanding over the issues.

The new OMA policy features include:

• Discretionary food and drink product advertising to be restricted from areas within 150 metres* of a primary of secondary school in Australia.
• Food and drink advertising to be based on Australian Dietary Guidelines and the Australian Health Star Rating system.
• $3 million of advertising space across Australia every year donated to feature targeted advertising campaigns supporting healthy diet and lifestyle choices.
• Full creative support from the OOH industry to create efficacious and meaningful campaigns that will reach the targeted audience.
• Compliance monitoring of the national restrictions with annual reports provided to state and federal governments.
• Annual meetings to be held with key industry stakeholders and health promotion experts to assess the implementation and efficacy of the restrictions and the educational programs.