Rules for advertising of infant foods are inadequate, says lawyer
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
Sector companies have announced voluntary restrictions on advertising.
Children under 12 years will be spared from targeted advertising.
Ahead Project Children and consumption, the Institute Alana, fighting against unfair advertising aimed at children, the lawyer Isabella Henriques approved self-regulatory advertising to the public is announced for 24 indútrias food this week.
For her, the measure is a recognition of the power companies harmful advertising aimed at exploring consumers without discrimination power.
Among the measures announced by companies in the sector are committed to not advertise to children under 12 years and limitations of advertising spots in the media that have 50% or more of the audience of the public. In an interview with G1, however, Isabella said that the decision of the industry can not replace the action of the government.
G1-The measure focuses on the need for regulation of advertising to children?
The self-regulatory is very welcome. In early 2008, we learned that most companies had done this kind of commitment out of Brazil. In partnership with the Institute for Consumer Protection (IDEC), sent letters to eleven companies asking if those commitments were also valid here. Just received a response.
We made an estimation of the commitments made outside. In practice, they were not being observed in Brazil.
G1 - Companies dealing Brazilian consumers with less importance?
They were dealing with a Brazilian child with prejudice, and that was the reasoning of our representation. It was a well-founded complaint, we even had a meeting at the Ministry of Justice on the matter. The main contention here is not the failure of Brazilian legislation, which provides for even more stringent, but this discrimination with the Brazilian children.
G1 - A self-regulatory was not spontaneous? She then came a demand that already existed?
I think so. It arose from a demand of society. The reasoning was the Treaty on the Rights of the Child, to which Brazil is a signatory and which says the state can not treat the child with prejudice for the other signatories. It is very positive that commitment of companies, it is a recognition of their importance to preserve and to protect the child. So it is also a recognition that advertising is but one of the factors contributing to the increase in childhood obesity.
G1 - But companies will restrict the advertising in accordance with what they consider to be healthy or not.
Then we get into another problem. At first it is good that happens. It is a first step, but the path is much longer than that. The compromise that was made is still far from ideal. Each company establishes its own discretion, for example, to say what is healthy, is not ideal. Ideally, the consumer receives a single information. Also why the self-regulatory not replace the need for action by the government.
G1 - How is the public consultation Anvisa about it?
This is actually quite striking in the rules. It is not just about advertising aimed at children, but has a specific chapter on this. The self-regulatory is much milder. It is important to happen, but not replace the role of government.
G1 - You believe that the measure is a way for companies to preserve a more restrictive legislation?
I believe it is a movement of the food industry to respond to society. It is difficult to talk, not involved in the drafting of the document. I believe that is a result of pressure from society as a whole.
Source: G1
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
Important:
The JurisWay site does not interfere in the work provided by doctrine, why only reflect the opinions, ideas and concepts of their authors.
