Self-regulation by industry of food marketing is having little impact during children's preferred television
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of self-regulation of food marketing to children by comparing, during children's preferred viewing on television, the differences in food/beverage marketing between two groups of corporations: 17 corporations participating in the Canadian Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CAI) and 35 corporations not participating (non-CAI) in this initiative. METHODS: The food/beverage marketing activities of CAI and non-CAI corporations during 99.5 hours of children's preferred viewing on television were compared. First, the preferred television viewing of 272 children aged 10-12 years from Ontario and Quebec who completed TV viewing journals for a seven-day period was determined. A total of 32 television stations were simultaneously recorded, and a content analysis of children's preferred viewing was conducted and included coding all food/beverage promotions and their nutritional content. Each food/beverage promotion was classified by corporation type (i.e., CAI or non-CAI). RESULTS: The CAI was responsible for significantly more food/beverage promotions, and used media characters and repetition more frequently in their food/beverage promotions than the non-CAI group. Nutritionally, the CAI food/beverage promotions were higher in fats, sugar, sodium and energy per 100 grams. A significantly greater proportion of the CAI food/beverage promotions were considered 'less healthy' compared to the non-CAI promotions. CONCLUSION: With the exception of the four corporations that did not market to children at all, the commitments that have been made in the CAI are not having a significant impact on the food and beverage marketing environment on television which is viewed by 10-12-year-olds.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".