Search

: Objective: The aim of this study was to describe advertising expenditure for sugary drinks compared with alternative cold non‐alcoholic beverages (artificially sweetened beverages, plain water, plain milk) between 2016 and 2018 across Australian media channels. Methods: Monthly estimates of advertising expenditure for non‐alcoholic beverages were obtained from Nielsen Media and aggregated by product type and media. Results: Total sugary drink advertising expenditure between 2016 and 2018 ($129.5M) significantly exceeded expenditure on artificially sweetened drinks ($23.26M), plain water ($14.27M), and plain milk ($31.30M). Television and out‐of‐home advertising accounted for the largest share of sugary drink advertising (45%, 35%). Expenditure on out‐of‐home advertising was more heavily dominated by sugary drinks (75%) than advertising in all media combined (65%). Sugary drink advertising peaked in warmer months and was lowest in August. Soft drinks (26%), flavoured milks (24%) and energy drinks (21%) accounted for the majority of sugary drink advertising. Conclusions: Cold non‐alcoholic beverage advertising in Australian media is dominated by the advertising of sugary drinks. Implications for public health: Restricting unhealthy beverage advertising on television and out‐of‐home media may be most effective initially. However, comprehensive restrictions capturing a broader range of media and settings would be optimal to prevent displacement and limit advertising reach and exposure., In 2018, rates of overweight and obesity in Australia reached 67% in adults and 25% in children and adolescents, increasing the risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease and 13 [...]

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians (Indigenous Australians) have more than twice the smoking prevalence of non-Indigenous Australians. Anti-smoking campaigns have demonstrated success in the general population but little is known about their impact among Indigenous people. A total of 143 Indigenous and a comparison group of 156 non-Indigenous smokers from South Australia were shown 10 anti-smoking advertisements representing a range of advertisements typically aired in Australia. Participants rated advertisements on a five-point Likert scale assessing factors including message acceptance and personalized effectiveness. On average, Indigenous people rated the mainstream advertisements higher than non-Indigenous people and were more likely to report that they provided new information. Advertisements with strong graphic imagery depicting the health effects of smoking were rated highest by Indigenous smokers. Advertisements featuring real people describing the serious health consequences of smoking received mixed responses. Those featuring an ill person were rated higher by Indigenous people than those featuring the family of the person affected by a smoking-related disease. With limited Indigenous-specific messages available and given the finite resources of most public health campaigns, exposure to mainstream strong graphic and emotive first-person narratives about the health effects of smoking are likely to be highly motivating for Indigenous smokers.

Emotive anti-tobacco advertisements can increase quitting. Discrete emotion theories suggest evoking fear may be more effective than sadness; less research has focused on hope. A weekly cross-sectional survey of smokers and recent quitters (N = 7683) measured past-month quit attempts. The main predictor was level of exposure to four different types of anti-tobacco advertisements broadcast in the two months prior to quit attempts: advertisements predominantly evoking fear, sadness, hope, or evoking multiple negative emotions (i.e., fear, guilt, and/or sadness). Greater exposure to fear-evoking advertisements (OR = 2.16, p < .01) increased odds of making a quit attempt and showed similar effectiveness among those in lower and higher SES areas. Greater exposure to advertisements evoking multiple negative emotions increased quit attempts (OR = 1.70, p < .01), but interactions indicated this was driven by those in lower SES, but not higher SES areas. Greater exposure to hope-evoking advertisements enhanced effects of fear-evoking advertisements among those in higher SES, but not lower SES areas. Findings suggest to be maximally effective across the whole population avoid messages evoking sadness and use messages eliciting fear. If the aim is to specifically motivate those living in lower SES areas where smoking rates are higher, multiple negative emotion messages, but not hope-evoking messages, may also be effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective We sought to determine the relative frequency and nature of personal display of cigarette packs by smokers in two Australian cities where 30% front-of-pack and 90% back-of-pack health warnings have been used since 2006 and comprehensive tobacco marketing restrictions apply. Methods An observational study counted patrons, active smokers and tobacco packs at cafés, restaurants and bars with outdoor seating. Pack orientation and use of cigarette cases were also noted. Results Overall, 18 954 patrons, 1576 active smokers and 2153 packs were observed, meaning that one out of every 12.0 patrons was actively smoking, and one of every 8.8 patrons displayed a pack. Packs were more frequently observed in lower socio-economic neighbourhoods, reflecting the higher prevalence of smoking in those regions. Packs were displayed less often in venues where children were present, suggesting a greater tendency not to smoke around children. Most packs (81.4%) were oriented face-up, permitting prominent brand display. Only 1.5% of observed packs were cigarette cases, and 4.2% of packs were concealed by another item, such as a phone or wallet. Conclusions Tobacco packs are frequently seen on table-tops in café strips, providing many opportunities for other patrons and passers-by to be incidentally exposed to cigarette brand names and imagery. Use of cigarette cases is rare, suggesting that smokers eventually habituate to pictorial warnings on branded packs and/or find repeated decanting of each newly purchased branded pack into a case to be inconvenient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective We aimed to assess change in the availability of illicit tobacco in small mixed business retail outlets following the December 2012 introduction of plain packaging in Australia. Methods 303 small retail outlets were visited in June and September 2012 (baseline months), and in December 2012 and February, April and July 2013. Fieldworkers requested a particular low-cost brand of cigarettes and then pressed the retailer for an ‘even cheaper' brand. The cheapest pack of cigarettes offered was purchased and later examined to assess any divergence from prescribed Australian packaging regulations. The price paid was compared with tax liability and recommended retail price for the particular brand and pack size. In a sub-set of 179 stores, fieldworkers then asked the retailer about availability of unbranded (chop-chop) tobacco. Results Thirteen (2.2%) of 598 packs purchased pre-plain packaging were either non-compliant with Australian health warnings and/or suspiciously priced. Four packs (1.3%) of 297 met either or both criteria in the December implementation month, and five (0.6%) of 878 did so in the three collection months following implementation. Chop-chop was offered upon enquiry on 0.6% (n=2) of 338 occasions prior to implementation, 0.6% (n=1) of 170 occasions in the December 2012 implementation month, and 0.6% (n=3) of 514 occasions postimplementation. The likelihood of a ‘positive’ response (either an offer to sell or information about where unbranded tobacco may be purchased) did not differ across preimplementation, duringimplementation and postimplementation waves. Conclusions Overall, packs judged likely to be illicit were sold in response to requests for cheapest available packs on fewer than one percent of occasions. Offers to sell unbranded tobacco were rare. No change in availability of illicit tobacco was observed following implementation of plain packaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the trends in tobacco product development since the passage of the plain packaging legislation in the lower house of Australian Parliament on November 20, 2011. The trends include the reminders to smokers on the product quality, the more use of brand names, extensions, and variants, and the strong focus on value for money. Other trends discussed include the introduction of new types of cigarette and removal of unpopular brands and package sizes.