This document discusses a study analyzing mobile advergames marketed toward children by major food and beverage brands. It found that while many games were engaging and used new interactive features, they often did not clearly disclose advertising intent or provide nutritional information as suggested by self-regulatory guidelines. Additionally, current regulations do not fully cover evolving digital advertising techniques used in these games. The study argues the food and beverage industry and tech companies need to strengthen oversight of mobile advergames to better protect children.

1. MOBILE ADVERGAMES:
SIMPLY FUN OR SLIGHTLY
DECEPTIVE?
STEPHAN DAHL, UNIVERSITY OF HULL
LYNNE EAGLE, JAMES COOK
UNIVERSITY

2. Concerns
• Food marketers have long been criticised for
contributing to childhood obesity (Hastings et
al., 2003)
• causing domestic conflict when children
pester their parents for advertised products
(Marshall et al., 2007)
• children’s cognitive abilities are not yet fully
developed (Eagle, 2007; Moses and Baldwin
2005).

3. • children may be highly susceptible to persuasion (such
as that delivered in advergames) due to their
immersive nature
- but there is a lack of empirical evidence to support
these claims (van Reijmersdal et al., 2011; Mallinckrodt
& Mizerski, 2007).
• lack of empirical evidence regarding children’s
relationships with brands; although brand preferences
are evident from young ages (John, 1999) and brand
knowledge may be a part of socialization and
‘playground cool’ (Ritson & Elliott, 1999),

4. • industry has responded by claiming to self-
regulate advergame content (and other
marketing activity) , e.g.
Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising
Initiative (CFBAI)

5. Subliminal?
• Original study has been shown to have been
falsified - popular media have continued to claim
behavioural effects (Broyles, 2006; Keys, 1973).
• Short term effects have been created in artificial
laboratory situations; there is no evidence of real-
world effects (Cooper & Cooper, 2002).
• Advertising content in advergames is overt, albeit
subtle

6. Processing of advergame messages
• low involvement, with few cognitive / rational
decision choices (Heath, 2000) creates
“exposure effect”
• preference can be created by simply repeating
message exposure with no active cognitive
processing of messages.

7. Media usage
• moving beyond traditional media – and
computer based internet access.
• Mobile phones in particular have found their
way into everyday life of young people (Davie
et al., 2004; OFCOM, 2008)
• children are often allowed to play games on
adults’ mobile phones,

8. • Advertising Standards Authority in the UK only
covers “non-paid-for space online under [the
advertiser's] control”,
which includes “advertiser-controlled pages
on social networking websites”
• but NOT pages and profiles of other users
/social networks etc
(Committee of Advertising Practice, 2010).

9. Our study
• content analysis of advergames (Hofmeister-
Toth & Nagy, 2011, Quilliam et al., 2011, Dahl
et al., 2008)
• assessment of actual practice
• adherence to self-regulatory codes

10. • 57 major advertisers:
– confectionary,
– chewing gum,
– crisps,
– carbonated drinks and
– cereals
(Mintel 2009, 2011a, 2011b, 2011c, 2011d)
Contained brands targeting children (e.g. Weetabix
Kids) and targeting mature market (e.g. Green & Black).

11. “any application that allowed the
consumer to interact with the application
in a playful or joyful manner”
arcade-like games,
VR/AuR apps
Excluded
no interaction
language other than English.
Apple iPhone HTC Google Android
34 games 12 games

12. Chocolates
Brand Owned by CFBAI IPhone n Android n
Cadbury Dairy Milk Kraft Foods ü ü 2 ü 1
Galaxy Mars Mars, Inc ü û 0 û 0
Maltesers Mars, Inc ü ü 2 û 0
Mars Mars, Inc ü û 0 û 0
Kitkat Nestle ü ü 2 ü 1
Aero Nestle ü û 0 û 0
Wispa Kraft Foods ü ü 2 ü 1
Snickers Mars, Inc ü û 0 û 0
Milky Bar Nestle ü ü 1 û 0
Twirl Kraft Foods ü ü 1 û 0
Twix Mars, Inc ü û 0 û 0
Green & Black Kraft Foods ü û 0 û 0

13. Crisps
Brand Owned by CFBAI IPhone n Android n
Walkers PepsiCo ü ü 1 û 0
Pringles Diamond û ü 3 ü 1
Doritos PepsiCo ü ü 1 ü 1
McCoy's United Biscuits û û 0 û 0
Kettle Chips Diamond û û 0 û 0
Quavers PepsiCo ü ü 1 ü 1
Hula Hoops United Biscuits û ü 1 û 0
Mini Cheddars United Biscuits û û 0 û 0
Monster Munch PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
Wotsits PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
French Fries PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
walkers Baked PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
Seabrook crisps Seabrook û û 0 û 0
Squares PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
Skips United Biscuits û û 0 û 0
salt n shake PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
Tyrrells Tyrrells û û 0 û 0
Redsky PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0

14. Carbonated Drinks
Brand Owned by CFBAI IPhone n Android n
Coca-Cola The Coca-Cola Comp. ü ü 7 ü 4
Pepsi PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
Schweppes Dr Pepper Snapple û û 0 û 0
Fanta The Coca-Cola Comp. ü ü 1 û 0
Irn-Bru A. G. Barr û û 0 û 0
Dr Pepper Dr Pepper Snapple û û 0 û 0
Sprite The Coca-Cola Comp. ü ü 1 û 0
7UP Dr Pepper Snapple û û 0 û 0
Tango BritVic û û 0 û 0
R White’s BritVic û û 0 û 0

15. Chewing Gum/Confectionary
Brand Owned by CFBAI IPhone n Android n
Wrigley’s Extra Mars, Inc ü ü 1 ü 1
Randoms Nestle ü û 0 û 0
Starmix Haribo û ü 1 û 0
Natural Confectionery Co Kraft Foods ü û 0 û 0
Wrigley’s 5 Mars, Inc ü ü 1 û 0
Maynards Wine Gums Kraft Foods ü û 0 û 0
Tic Tac Ferrero û ü 2 û 0
Tangfastics Haribo û û 0 û 0
Orbit Complete Mars, Inc ü û 0 û 0
Extra Strong Gum Kraft Foods ü û 0 û 0

16. Cereals
Brand Owned by CFAI IPhone n Android n
Kellogg’s Kellogg Company ü ü 2 ü 1
Nestlé Nestle ü û 0 û 0
Weetabix Weetabix û ü 1 û 0
Jordans W. Jordans û û 0 û 0
Kraft Foods Kraft Foods ü û 0 û 0
Quaker Oats PepsiCo ü û 0 û 0
Honey Monster Foods Honey Monster Foods û û 0 û 0

17. Number of games
iPhone Android %
CFBAI Member (36) 26 11 72.2%
Non-members (20) 8 1 40%
not consistent:
PepsiCo:
None for drink brands
– but for Dorito
Nestlé:
None for cereal brands
- but two of their four confectionary brands.

18. Coding
• Genre
• Advertising Break
• Age rating
• Sponsor appearance
• Need for registration
• Nutrition information
• Incentives to purchase (promotions)
• Social Media functions
• Personalisation

19. Genre
Genre iPhone % Android %
Adventure/Maze 7 21 2 1
6
Music 5 15 3 2
5
Sport 2 6 0
Simulation 1 3 0
Others 11 33 4 3
3
Examples of others:
Snowglobe
Spin the bottle
Augmented Reality

22. Ad break
decrease desire for and memory of the advertised
product – but do not help children to recognise the
commercial intent
An and Stern (2011)
iPhone % Android %
Ad Break 0 0 0 0

23. Age Verification
Established practice/requirement for digital content
Committee of Advertising Practice – UK
Children’s Advertising Review Unit - US
iPhone % Android %
Age Verification 4 12 2 1
6
But only asked for during first run!

24. Age rating
• iPhone: All (but one) 4+
• Android: All “Everyone” / “Low Maturity”
• For comparison
Football Fan Challenge (NHS): 17+

25. Registration
• Six repeatedly
• Five asked for
• Majority no registration

26. Appearance
iPhone % Android %
Active Game Component 19 58 6 5
0
Background Item 12 36 4 3
0
Banners Outside Gamespace 4 12 2 1
6
Logo During Game 23 70 10 8
3
Package 14 42 5 4
1
Food-item 13 39 4 3
0
Brand Character 6 18 3 2
5

28. Messages
• 4 related to low calories
• 2 no sugar
• 2 general
• NO nutritional information
NO health/stay active information

30. Incentives
iPhone % Android %
Prize draws 4 12 3 2
4
Full access with code 3 9 2 1
6
CAP & CARU Code compliance?
Persuasion Knowledge?

32. Social Functions
iPhone % Android %
Facebook Access 18 54 11 91
Twitter 8 24 6 50
Email 9 27 5 41
SMS 1 3 1 8
General Invite 10 30 6 50
Sharing of Score 8 24 5 41
Ecard 4 12 1 8
Direct Challenge 5 15 2 16
Gift Item 2 6 1 8
Promotions 1 3 1 8

34. Personalisation
Genre iPhone % Android %
Game Mode 15 45 6 5
0
Character 8 24 3 2
5
Game space 8 24 4 3
3

35. Discussion
• mobile advergames are still a relatively new
phenomenon
• currently available games successfully
enhance conventional video-gaming by using
social networking features and virtual
reality/augmented reality features – making
these games more engaging, personal and
interactive than tradition “standalone” games
and many advergames

36. • current regulatory codes promised to extend
beyond traditional media, and provide a
framework for digital media
• BUT the codes fail to encompass these new,
and constantly evolving media forms.

37. • “branded play-scape” is blurring of the
boundary not only of
entertainment and commerce,
but also of inter-personal and commercial
communication,

38. • Self-regulation of the industry seems so far
not to hold pace with these developments and
both the spirit and substance of advertising
codes seem to be interpreted inconsistently,
both across advertisers and within brands
owned by the same parent company.

39. • Distributors of these games, i.e. Apple and
Google, should consider revising their
guidance as to the age requirements for these
applications, as present advice is confusing.

40. • some sectors of the industry seem to view
less than totally responsible approach in
unregulated areas as unproblematic.
Failure of the industry to ensure exemplary
behaviour from its members may lead to the
imposition of greater restrictions on
marketing communication for all members of
the industry