Why We Need a More Equitable Food Marketing Environment

The report focused on 19 food and beverage companies in the U.S., representing 74 percent of all food and beverage advertising spending in 2021. We analyzed changes in TV ad exposure and spending from 2017 and 2021 and examined companies’ public statements about their targeted marketing campaigns and initiatives. 

The results were shocking: 

• While overall TV ad spending decreased during these years, companies increased the percentage of their TV ad budgets to Spanish-language channels, and Black children and adults continued to view more food and beverage ads than their White counterparts. 
• In 2021, candy, sugary drinks, cereal, and sweet/savory snacks represented 75% of Spanish-language and Black-targeted TV ad spending, up from approximately 50% of each in 2017.
• The initiatives and campaigns focusing on diversity, equity, and inclusion and causes important to Black and Hispanic consumers we identified in this report almost exclusively promoted unhealthy products.

And Black and Hispanic young people get a double-dose of targeting with marketing strategies that both appeal to their age and have cultural relevance. For example, in our recent report we found multiple campaigns—many of which utilized youth-oriented platforms such as TikTok and Instagram—that featured hip-hop and Latinx stars as spokespeople for products such as Flamin’ Hot Cheetos, Doritos, Sprite, and Oreos.

It’s also worthwhile to look at the other factors that contribute to the disparities we see in exposure to food marketing. For instance, a family with more resources may pay to opt out of ads on video streaming services or smartphone games, safeguarding their children from additional digital marketing. Or a family that can afford childcare can go grocery shopping without bringing their children along, limiting their children’s exposure to child-directed packaging and in-store displays designed to promote purchase requests. Finally, research documents a disproportionate presence of unhealthy food marketing in Black or Hispanic versus White neighborhoods and in lower-income versus higher-income neighborhoods.

Reshaping our food environment by limiting food marketing is not at the top of our national public health priorities. It should be. We know that diet-related diseases are among the leading causes of death in this country and that food marketing directly influences the consumption of products that contribute to these diseases. 

So what can we do when companies aren’t following through on their promises to market healthy food? It’s clear from the incongruence between food companies’ campaign statements and their advertising spending that self-regulation isn’t enough, with a major barrier being that food and beverage companies’ primary goal is to generate profits, not increase public health. And the responsibility should not rest on the individual to “make better choices” or fix our food environment: we need serious structural changes in order to make the healthy choice the available and affordable choice for all consumers, no matter their race, ethnicity, or income level.

In order to limit young peoples’ access to and taste for unhealthy products, policies must hold food companies accountable for marketing unhealthy food to targeted populations. Whether through sugary drink taxes, policies to reduce marketing to children, front-of-package label changes, or incentives for making healthy choices, our local and federal leaders must take a stand to challenge industry and mitigate the harms of food marketing on consumers. While the food industry has power, so does the government. It can use its power for good.