HEAD2HEAD: YESJoe Barry says the drinks companies spend more than €50 million a year on adverts because they know advertising increases consumption NOMichael Patton says there is no evidence that a ban would be as effective as the current restrictions.
Hardly a week goes by without another report on our drinking patterns or on the adverse effects of alcohol use in Ireland. Top of the league for binge drinking; high up the list for underage drinking; violent public order offences; a wide spectrum of health problems caused by alcohol. The list goes on, coupled with our seeming inability to get to grips with the problem.
A goodly proportion of the extra money in our pockets is being spent satisfying the national thirst. Irish third-level students spend more on alcohol than food. Alcohol marketing and advertising is doing well in Ireland these days. In 2005 the alcohol companies spent more than €50 million in Ireland on advertising. But at what cost to the rest of us?
Alcohol is not an ordinary commodity and the question arises as to the appropriateness of allowing the multinational producers of alcohol to market and advertise their products without hindrance in the face of the serious health and social harms caused. The alcohol industry counters attempts to restrict its advertising and marketing practices by saying that advertising does not increase overall consumption; €50 million is an awful lot of money to spend if you do not believe it will lead to an increase in consumption.
Alcohol companies are concerned about image; they do not like it when alcohol-related harms are highlighted. Their current strategy is to add a rider to their adverts encouraging us to drink sensibly or responsibly. What does this mean? I do not see drinks company representatives in pubs at night encouraging people to drink sensibly.
Nor do I believe that genuine efforts are being made to address the serious problems emanating from the off-licence sector. I am not surprised at this. It is stretching the imagination to expect the industry to really want us to rein in our drinking. The profit on the 10th pint is the same as the profit on the first. The alcopop taken by a 16-year-old girl yields the same profit as that consumed "responsibly". To ask the industry to voluntarily regulate its marketing and advertising is asking too much. It is like putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop and asking him to show restraint; it is not in the nature of the beast.
IS IT TOO EXTREMEto ban advertising? Not according to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children when it recommended a ban in 2004. Not according to the President of the Royal College of Physicians in the United Kingdom who recently recommended the same. In a public attitudes survey published by Alcohol Action Ireland in 2006, 44 per cent said there should be an outright ban on all forms of alcohol advertising; 29 per cent said there should not, and 27 per cent were undecided.
If alcohol-related problems were a minor irritant to the health and social well-being of the people, one could say that advertising alcohol was not doing any harm. However, according to the World Health Organisation, alcohol represents a major public health problem globally. It is time to tip the balance back in favour of public health. Advertising works. However, the industry has successfully persuaded the Government not to regulate it. Two years ago the Government was on the point of placing some restrictions on advertising. A combination of the alcohol and advertising industries persuaded the Department of Health and Children not to go ahead. The industry initiative made its way into the voluntary code agreed by the department.
This episode where advertising/alcohol lobbying successfully subverted a stated desire by former minister for health Micheál Martin, publicly supported by the Taoiseach, to restrict alcohol advertising on TV to after 9pm was a salutary tale on the power of the alcohol industry in Ireland. It was doubly disappointing because the department had commissioned a report in 2001 on the impact of alcohol advertising on teenagers in Ireland. The report's authors concluded that the "selling" aspects of alcohol advertisements are all to do with linking alcohol to positive images of desirable lifestyles.
Attempts to bring in effective public health measures in this country to limit the harm caused by alcohol have been unsuccessful, mainly because of the influence of the industry. Even if the Government decides to take action on our behalf, we can be assured that the industry will mount expensive legal challenges at European level to protect its interests. Public health and alcohol industry interests are divergent on this matter. Choices will have to be made as to whether our Government or the globalised alcohol industry sets policy. Banning the advertising of alcohol would send a message from Government to the alcohol industry that its days of inappropriate and harmful influence in this country are over.
Prof Joe Barry is a senior lecturer in public health at Trinity College Dublin and medical adviser to the National Drugs Strategy Team.
There is no doubt that there is a problem with alcohol misuse in Ireland. The drinks industry is committed to playing its part to respond to this problem. In this context we fully accept the need to ensure that alcohol marketing is undertaken in a measured, responsible manner and is targeted at appropriate audiences. This objective is being successfully pursued by the industry in co-operation with many key stakeholders, including media owners and the Government.
For opponents of the alcohol industry, however, only a ban on advertising is deemed sufficient. But they produce no evidence to show what effect a ban might have or what the current impact of alcohol advertising in Ireland is.
The drinks industry believes there are four key reasons why alcohol advertising should not be banned:
1. Alcohol advertising in Ireland is already tightly restricted by way of a comprehensive series of regulations and codes. These codes are independently monitored and have continued to evolve in recent years.
2. Available evidence does not support an ads ban as an effective way to reduce alcohol misuse.
3. Ireland has one of the most open media markets with indigenous media battling hard against an increasing array of international media operations. Banning advertising will penalise the indigenous industries but will have no impact on international media.
4. Bans are crude instruments which glamorise the very things that are banned and encourage attempts to circumvent the ban.
The latter two points are self-explanatory, so let me expand on the first two.
As we stand, the following codes and regulations control the way alcohol can be advertised in Ireland: codes of the Advertising Standards Authority of Ireland governing the content of alcohol ads; the requirement that all alcohol advertising be cleared as suitable for use by Central Copy Clearance Ireland before it can be carried by any media owner; codes of the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI) imposing statutory obligations on broadcasters in respect of alcohol advertising; codes set down by MEAS (Mature Enjoyment of Alcohol in Society) and by the European Forum on Responsible Drinking; and the codes agreed 18 months ago by the Department of Health and Children to address the placement and volume of alcohol ads.
I would suggest there is no other industry in Ireland where advertising is as carefully regulated, and indeed the regulations in Ireland are among the most stringent worldwide.
And the codes work. No complaints against alcohol advertising have been upheld for two years and the industry is regarded as compliant by key stakeholders, including the BCI. The existence of this suite of codes has fundamentally altered the style, content and placement of alcohol advertising. Indeed many of the iconic ads of earlier years would simply fail to get past the current set of codes.
The anti-alcohol lobby insists that banning alcohol advertising will reduce consumption and tackle the problem of alcohol misuse and binge drinking. This argument is not supported by the international evidence. In 2003 the UK government's National Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy report found that the evidence is not sufficiently strong to suggest that measures, such as a ban on advertising or tightening existing restrictions about scheduling, should be imposed by regulation. The 2006 EU communication on alcohol-related harm did not recommend measures such as advertising, marketing or sponsorship restrictions but placed strong emphasis on measures to ensure the highest standards of commercial communications as are already practised in Ireland. A study of 17 countries concluded that advertisement bans have not decreased alcohol consumption or alcohol abuse.
OUR OWN LOCALexperience bears this out. A feature of the Irish alcohol market in recent years has been declining per capita consumption of beer, which benefits from the greatest amount of marketing investment, compared to growth in spirits consumption - which has had no broadcast advertising for more than 20 years - and wine consumption where, again, marketing investment is low. Critics will make much of the numbers spent on alcohol marketing, with figures of €60 million per annum mentioned. However, this is in the context of a €6 billion market and accelerating media costs. In fact, alcohol advertising expenditure is in decline relative to other consumer goods sectors.
So if a ban on advertising is not going to achieve the holy grail of fostering a culture of moderate alcohol consumption in Ireland, what will?
First we need targeted interventions against key aspects of alcohol misuse that create the most harm: drink-driving, underage drinking and excessive (binge) drinking. In addition we need to fundamentally challenge our culture and attitudes to alcohol in certain parts of our society. We need to shift attitudes to respect and value moderate alcohol consumption as part of a healthy, balanced lifestyle.
To achieve this, responsible marketing has its role to play. But pursuing a ban on advertising will achieve nothing. Indeed it can be argued that the real consequence of a ban might be to position price as the only meaningful differentiator between alcohol brands - forcing prices down and consumption up. Surely not the outcome that proponents of a ban would wish their campaign to secure.
Michael Patten is chairman of the Drinks Industry Group of Ireland.
Online: join the debate @ www.ireland.com/head2head . Last week we asked: Should the media report cases of suicide in detail? Here is an edited selection of your comments:
It would appear that the key to the question is not whether suicide should be discussed or whether incidents of death by suicide should be covered, but how much and what kind of detail is included. Both of the forum participants highlighted the issue of irresponsible coverage and the benefits of opening the debate and providing important supportive information. I agree that suicide has been a taboo subject, largely due to stigma and fear. It is really encouraging to see so much recent coverage on mental illness and the emerging concept of positive mental health.
In order to address suicide I really agree that we need to be looking at developing coping skills and providing positive examples and outlets for people to deal with emotional distress. Wealthy or poor, modern or postmodern - life is complicated. It is how we deal with this which contributes to our mental well-being. A recent poll asking young people with eating disorders why they didn't access help highlighted that their own fear and the stigma associated with mental ill-health were the biggest barriers. The media can help with this. Highlighting role models who have coped with mental ill-health would help to de-stigmatise the issue. In general, the promotion of minding your mental/emotional health as much as your physical health would be a huge first step. - Jennie O'Reilly, Ireland
It is time to seriously address this issue within the context of the Celtic Tiger era and the socio-economic strains that it has put on a generation of young men. The media's immense control over the collective consciousness of the people of Ireland puts it in an incredibly powerful and profound position. It is time for this country to face the realities of this devastating trend. The media needs to be brave enough to lead the way. - John Dineen, United States
Your poll result showing the majority of voters being against the media reporting suicides in detail indicates to me that the Irish people are in denial about the current status quo within this state. - Nicolas Clifton, Ireland
Suicide and self-harm as a general topic should be discussed. It is something that has come to affect everyone in Ireland. However, I don't think it is appropriate to report isolated incidents as it will only add to the pain families are already going through. [Coverage should aim] not only to raise awareness but to help understanding and to show that there is help for those who need it. It can no longer be ignored, and if it is, the problem will only get worse. Not only is suicide a problem that needs to be addressed - self-harm is also a problem. Yes, there are cases where self-harm is carried out to attract attention, but I am sure there are far more cases where it is a method of coping with problems. Maybe that cut on your brother's/sister's/child's arm wasn't an accident.
Who knows, because more often than not these people suffer in silence, and even when confronted about it they deny the truth. - Edel, Ireland
Irish Times policy on the reporting of suicide is not to name the dead person unless there is a compelling public interest in doing otherwise, such as the death of a well-known person, a public suicide, a debate over voluntary euthanasia or a mass suicide.
We try to avoid graphic details that would sensationalise suicide or give information on the methods used that might encourage copycat incidents. We neither use terms such as "commit suicide", which are redolent of an era when suicide was regarded as a crime, nor language which would glamorise what must always be seen as a negative, destructive act. We welcome readers' comments on this policy and on any aspect of our coverage of the issue.