The Workshop of the PromoKids Network in Bergen 12 June 2019. Eva Rsutad de Brisis.

1. Encourage good and
responsible marketing
practices (MFU)
The Norwegian Food and Drink Industry
Professional Practises Committee
Eva Rustad de Brisis, senior advisor
Foto: Ole Walter Jacobsen

2. Process of regulation marketing in Norway
2011
• MOH & Ministry of Children, Equality
and Social Inclusion established a
working group to explore whether the
WHO recommendations were met by
current Norwegian law and practice
2012
• Public consultation on a proposal for
new statutory regulation, restricting
marketing to children under the age of
18 years
2013
• Revised proposal for statutory
regulation submitted for public
consultation, restricting marketing to
children under the age of 16 years
• The food industry was invited to
submit a proposal for self-regulation
(that would be sufficiently effective)
• The Government decided to test the
voluntary industry code for a two
year period
21/06/2019 2

3. MFU - the Norwegian Food and Drink
Industry Professional Practises Committee
• Selfregulatory body owned by industry:
• Virke - The Enterprise Federation of Norway
• NHO - Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise
• ANFO- The Norwegian Association of Advertisers
• Has representation from marketing, legal and
nutrition
• The Directorate of Health has one member. In
addition an independent organisation is represented
• The regulation was established with the consent of
the Ministries of Health and Children
• Consist of a Code and supplementary
Guidance together with a Product List, specify the
scope of the scheme, and a guidance for the use of
social media

4. What do MFU do?
• Future campaigns can have a
confidential pre-judgment
• Treat complaints on marketing
activities that people find in conflict
with Code and Guidance of MFU
• Decisions made in MFU is published
”name & shame”
• Give information to the industry,
media, consumer, authorities

5. The MFU Code
• Product list: in line with the law
proposal from Norwegian ministry
• Under 13 years: no marketing
specifically aimed at them
Marketing defined as all sales
promoting activities targeted
specifically at children, except
- normal display in shops
- product itself and packaging
- sponsoring with only name & logo
See www.mfu.as

6. MFU SOME
• MFU has prepared a guide on
the use of social media called
MFU SOME
• Takes into account
• current Norwegian legislation
formulated through the Consumer
Ombudsman's guidance and
• the Media Authority's rules for
youtubers and video bloggers in
addition to MFU's own guidelines
and guidance

7. Complaints and pre-judgements
2017 - March 2018
• 31 complaints represents
• 14 violations
• 16 ok
• 1 outside the scope of MFU
• 26 different campaigns
prejudged
21.06.2019 7

8. MFU evaluation conducted by the Directorate of
Health in 2016
The MFU evaluation consisted of 4 parts:
1. A systematic survey of advertising of unhealthy food and drinks to children on
TV and internet in 2016 (conducted by independent research institutes
according to the Nordic Evaluation Model)
2. A self-evaluation by MFU of their work during the time period 2013-2016,
including an assessment of achieved results during this period (until March
2016)
3. An assessment of views held by other actors (civil society) (May 2016)
4. An overall assessment by the Directorate of Health

9. 1. Systematic survey of advertising of unhealthy food
and drinks to children on TV and internet (SIFO)
• Advertising of products that according to MFU should not be
marketed to children:
• TV: 3 % of all advertising; 16 % of all advertising of food and drinks
• Social media/internet: 16 % of all advertising and 61 % of all advertising
of food and drinks registered by a sample of children – for the most part
on Facebook and You Tube.
• Main findings from a qualitative content analysis:
• Few TV ads for unhealthy food and drinks were aired in connection with typical
children’s programming. Identified ads were seen to have relative low
appeal for the younger children – both with respect to form and content
• On social media, however, the advertising had a form and content that
clearly was designed for a younger audience (use of language, activities
portrayed, contests etc.)

10. 2. MFU self-evaluation – their summary:
• Digital media - age limit
• Stopped Digital playsites/
children brand site
• The industry has changed its
behaviour
• Affects innovation work
• Prejudgements
• Changes in the cinema industry
• No competitions
• No extra products attached
aimed at children
• Point of sales material
completely changed
• Change in store design
21.06.2019 10

11. 3. Assessment of views held by other actors
Several actors voiced the following views:
• There is a need to make the code stricter and more inclusive
• THE MFU code needs to be clarified and more easy to understand
• MFU needs to be more visible and known - particularly by the
consumers
• The complaint process needs to be improved
• The MFU web-page needs to be improved and promoted to
consumers
• The consequences of any violation need to be clarified and sanctions –
other than naming and shaming – should be considered

12. 4. Overall MFU assessment by the
Directorate of Health
• Positive aspects:
• Preventive effect – MFU’s
proactive function through
confidential pre-judgment of
future campaigns
• Business involvement, information
activities, training and dialog with
different actors within the
business community
• Transparent process – thorough
complaint deliberations and the
conclusions are made public
• Challenges and need for
improvement:
• Not seen as comprehensive
enough
• Limited consequences when
violating the Code
• Awareness and knowledge
regarding MFU is too low among
consumers/the public

13. MFU – the code was revised as of September 2016
• Clarification of the Code
• Always overall assessment product/ media/tools
• Easier to cheque marketing cases – examples has been attached in the
Guidance
• Changes incl:
• Stricter placement of products
• E-commerce
• Digital media : Addressing age limit in social media
• Follow up on bloggers/influencers/you-tubers
• All media are included
• The Professional Practises Committee acts dynamically
• Pre-judgements
• sugar free
• New product types that did not exist 2013/2014
21.06.2019 13

14. Conclusions
• Monitoring the self-regulatory mechanism MFU, clearly has contributed to
identifying positive aspects, as well limitations with this system
• The first 2- year evaluation resulted in a revised code that to some extent address the
challenges identified
• The dialog between the authorities, the MFU industry actors and other actors (NGOs)
addressing how to improve MFU should continue
• There clearly is a need for continued monitoring of marketing to children
• The health and consumer authorities need to promote the MFU in order to further
increase public awareness, accountability and compliance
• The MFU should be evaluated again
• The statutory action proposed in 2012 needs to be considered as a relevant
alternative to self regulation during the next MFU evaluation

15. What the future holds:
• New evaluation planned for 2019
• NIPH will conduct this evaluation
• Continue or make changes?