Valerie Elliott, Consumer Editor
2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now
Anomalies contained in new rules limiting junk food advertisements during children’s programmes mean that cheese and porridge cannot be promoted during Bob the Builder but fast-food restaurants have free rein to advertise during Dancing on Ice or The X Factor.
The rules, published yesterday by Ofcom, the broadcast regulator, have left parents, health campaigners, food manufacturers and the advertising industry all unhappy.
The consumer watchdog Which? predicted a rush of advertisements for oven chips, chicken nuggets and sugary breakfast cereals during early-evening family viewing.
There is concern that while characters such as Shrek or Postman Pat cannot be used to endorse food products on TV, companies can continue to use brand characters, such as Tony the Tiger on Kellogg’s Frosties.
And there is nothing in the rules to prevent a company such as Burger King or Cadbury advertising its brand rather than a product.
The anomalies arise because of the formula devised by the Food Standards Agency to decide what is a “good” or “bad” food. A food classified as “high in saturated fat, salt or sugar” scores 4 points or more, while a drink classified as “high in saturated fat, salt or sugar” scores 1 point or more.
Every food is scored according to a 100g portion. This means that foods which are normally eaten only in small amounts — such as cheese, raisins or Marmite — are treated in the same way as a large burger from a fast-food outlet.
Campaign groups were disappointed that Ofcom rejected a 9pm watershed on junk food adverts. However, they were pleased that it had recognised the need to target older children under 16. Junk food adverts cannot be shown during programmes such as Friends and Hollyoaks, which are cult viewing among young teenagers.
The new rules for programmes aimed at children aged 4 to 9 will come into force on April 1. The rules for programmes aimed at the under16s will come into effect on January 1 next year.
Current advertising campaigns can continue on TV until the end of June, although dedicated children’s channels have until December 2008 to phase in the changes.
Ofcom estimates that the total impact on broadcasters’ revenue could be as much as £39 million in the first year.
Last night industry sources conceded privately that they could live with this shortfall as they expected junk food advertising to remain on screen.
Currently, the commercial broadcasters spend £40 million on children’s television. There are concerns that, with advertising falling, investment in children’s television will plummet.
Ofcom rejected a blanket ban, saying that this would have a draconian impact.
The music channels and the broadcasters that target children will be the most severely hit. Time Warner, the owner of Cartoon Network, is expected to lose about 4 per cent of revenues; by contrast, the impact on ITV and Channel 4 will be less than 1 per cent.
Melanie Leach, director general of the Food and Drink Federation, slammed the extension of new rules to under16s as “disproportionate”. She is also vehemently opposed to the formula to decide if a food product is healthy or unhealthy.
There is concern that firms have not been given incentives to reformulate products. Baby-bel cheese, for example, has introduced a range that is 30 per cent lower in fat but still faces a ban under the formula.
Tessa Jowell, the Culture Secretary, said that the Government would take further action if necessary. But she added: “It is important to remember that there is no single magic bullet solution. A healthy diet, regular exercise and good education about food and lifestyle all have a role to play in tackling childhood obesity.”
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
Have you ever dreamed of owning your own racehorse or a beautiful painting?
Enjoy comfort, safety, space and great design. Plus enter our great competition
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Are you California dreaming? Explore the wonders of the Golden State. Also enter our fantastic competition
Do you have what it takes to be a Times photographer?
Your brain is capable of more than you might think...
Find out to make the most of your money with our wealth management guides
Need help with your property? We have an entire how to guide - buying, selling, letting, moving, to help you
We are seeking entries for the inaugural Sunday Times Best Green Companies Awards
Enjoy some wonderful inspiring wildlife moments
An interactive preview of the brand new For Your Eyes Only exhibition

Love Sudoku? Play our brand new interactive game: with added functionality and daily prizes

Are you irritable when you return from work? Drained of emotion? You could be suffering from boreout
Prepare for some shock and awe, petrol lovers. Despite the greens trying to wipe it out, the car is about to offer us the most exciting year ever
We've trawled the brochures and websites to find this summer’s best holidays for every taste and budget

Overseas contacts and local business information

Everything you need to know, own or do

Direct from the farms
2007/07
£57,500
South East England
2007/07
£40,995
South East England
2006/06
£41,995
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
£40-55k+benefits+uncapped commission
Morgan Keating
South East
Up to £30,000
GLE
London
£
c£75,000 + executive benefits
Morgan Keating
London and South
Unpaid with travel expenses
Network Rail
Globrix, the property search engine
Visit Times Online Property for homes for sale or rent
Residential development site with planning permission
£1,500,000
Mortgages, bank accounts & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Dinarobin Hotel Golf & Spa 7 nights
From £1830 per person – saving £530.
Walking & multi-activity holidays in Cauterets. Stylish self-catering apartments.
From 350€ for 7 nights.
SAVE 25% on Sandals Luxury Resorts
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property.
© Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
I have yet to see a que of children without adults at the supermarket, with baskets and trolleys full of foods that are regularly advertised on tv. Nor do I know children that can actually afford the food stuffs advertised.
It is the adults that are purchasing the foods and they should know what foods are good and which foods should only be supplied in small quantities.
Jane, West midlands,
These restrictions are ill-thought and will have minimal desired impact. Issues arise when ill disciplined individuals create their own problems with regard to eating healthily; bad diets cause health problems, not individual foods. We need to eat these fats, salts and sugars which are required by our bodys need to function correctly. They are all essential ingredients of a healthy, balanced diet. Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, controversially even admitted A healthy diet and regular exercise all have a role to play in tackling childhood obesity. Yet I havent seen any advertising, for example, the joys of exercise. Whose senseless idea was it to bring into force a ban prohibiting cheese, raisins and marmite? Im healthy because Im disciplined, eat in proportion and have been educated in healthy eating; not because I wasnt told anything about them at all.
Good diets, regular exercise and awareness of foods will solve these problems, not the censorship that has been imposed.
Eliot Ducket, Cambs,
If advertising didn't work hard-nosed businessmen wouldn't spend money on it.
One persistent myth, created largely by advertising, is that some foods are healthy whilst others are bad. In fact humans are omnivores and can adapt to a very wide range of diets. Obseity is a complex problem and the housewife cannot generally tackle it succesfully by loading the supermarket trolley with foods marketed as "natural", or "low fat" or "organic".
Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK
I agree with the first statement posted. Not only should parents be regulating what their children eat, but also what they are watching on television. You can't prevent children from wanting to eat sweets by banning advertisements on television. Children need to be empowered with the knowledge to make their own choices; this means having parents who are willing to put in the time and effort to explain not only the harmful effects of sugar but also the power of advertising and the addictive nature of television itself. When children are aware that they are being manipulated they are a lot more discerning about their choices.
Caroline Westgate, London, England
These restrictions have nothing to do with protecting children or reducing obesity and all those involved know it. So called 'consumer' groups such as Which? and Sustain are not protecting children, they are merely frightening consumers and encouraging parents to blame others rather than themselves. We live in a blame society in which abdication of personal and parental responsbility is the problem, not only with obesity in children but in many other areas of social behaviour. Those calling for bans and restrictions are merely seeking to restrict productivity of business, restrict consumer choice and the legitimate dissemination of information needed for healthy competition. Preventing business to compete leads purely to price wars. The irony is that Which? and those politicians calling for bans could well lead to "junk" food becoming even cheaper! Eating cheese or even the odd chocolate bar is perfectly acceptable, its not bad foods but bad diets and lack of exercise that causes obesity.
Marina Palomba , London,
I also agree with this statement. Because junk food is a dangerlous for our health and it is a just like a sweet poison .
gaurav, DELHI, INDIA
You dont have to be a nutritional expert to know what foods are good and what's bad.
I could go out onto the main road in front of my home now and stop complete strangers at random and they would all have a rough idea of what makes a good meal and what should be eaten in moderation.
Next time your child asks for pizza or burgers try saying no sometimes it does work !
If kid's start to view foods like these as a treat every now and then rather than their staple diet it makes a big difference. Mind you the parents are the main culprits with the usual 'i haven't time..' etc.
Both my wife and myself work but one of us will be there to make sure that there is breakfast, a packed lunch for school and a meal cooked in the evening. It isn't rocket science !!
Glyn, Bolton, U.K.
When I was a child my parents chose what I ate - I didn't. If this was the case today this advertising ban would be seen as ridiculous - which, of course it is. Stop letting kids eat what they want and start telling them what to eat as generations of parents did. Or will the PC crowd tell us that this would be infringing the human rights of these 'little people'?
Roger Tilbury, Worthing,