Brightly colored wrapping paper, fun flavors, free toys (we're looking at you, Kinder Surprise): these are just some of the well-worn techniques confectionery brands use to increase their appeal to kids. This is the department.
The findings of Bite Back's latest report aren't all that surprising, as candy sales have long been driven by the power of begging.
The youth-led campaign group analyzed 262 products from 10 of the biggest FMCG manufacturers. In his seven of the manufacturers, the majority of products for children were his HFSS.
Mondelēz, owner of leading chocolate brand Cadbury, has been named “one of the worst offenders''. Of the products reviewed, all 58 that appeared to appeal to children were HFSS.
Ferrero (who owns Kinder and Nutella) also got slammed by Biteback. All 22 of the company's children's products analyzed by the campaign group were his HFSS.
Ferrero did not respond to The Grocer's request for comment, but Mondelez quickly defended himself and criticized Byte Back's research. “We disagree with the report's characterization of our products,” the spokesperson says.
“Our products are marketed to adults and parents and are intended as occasional treats to be enjoyed as part of a healthy, balanced diet.”
How did candy manufacturers react to Bite Back's report?
Mondelis' response (and Ferrero's lack of one) is unlikely to give health campaigners much hope for reform. So what can campaigners do to bring about change in the confectionery category?
A good place to start is by setting some guidelines. The Bite Back report identifies 18 ways manufacturers use to increase the appeal of their products to children, from including unconventional colors, shapes and flavors on packaging to using images of cartoons and licensed characters. Although it criticizes the method, it does not offer an alternative marketing method.
When The Grocer asked Byteback to provide guidelines for responsible pack design, CEO James Toop declined to elaborate, saying: Do not appeal to children right away. ”
Without a stricter framework in place, manufacturers will continue to exploit loopholes. A Nestlé spokesperson (also criticized in the report) said the use of “bright” colors or “unusual” shapes on packaging was “subjective” and unscientific. are doing.
Furthermore, banning all 18 child appeal techniques outlined in the Bite Back report would have significant commercial implications for manufacturers and retailers alike. This means that it is unlikely that campaign groups will voluntarily join either party.
The report cites KitKat cereal and Cadbury Mini Finger Daily Reese Snackers as examples of products that feature “unconventional flavours” in packs. But what happens to lucrative licensing agreements between suppliers if confectionery brands are barred from entering other categories because their launches might appeal to children?
What are “healthy” sweets?
Of course, confectionery brands can always reformulate their products to avoid packaging changes, but this also poses a significant commercial risk.
Historically, “better-for-you” sweets have had a hard time making an impact in grocery stores. Take Nestlé's Milky Bar Wowsomes, for example, which was withdrawn in 2020 after less than two years on the market. Or the 30% off sugar Cadbury Dairy, launched in 2019 after three years of development, 35 recipes and six consumer tests, with sales of just £305,500 in 2023. I did. [NIQ 52 w/e 31 December 2023].
Even Cadbury's latest foray into healthier innovation, the HFSS-compliant Fruitier & Nattier Trail Mix, made just £2.6 million in its first 10 months.
Manufacturers aren't giving up on good-for-you NPD (Mondelez is currently developing a chocolate bar with “75% less sugar and fat”), but they're unlikely to go all-in on it unless it proves profitable. .
A more practical first step might be to propose a ban on the use of cartoon characters on confectionery packaging. This is a concrete goal that retailers are likely to support. After all, Lidl, Aldi and Asda all took mascots off their cereal boxes in 2020 in an effort to rein in the powers that be and tackle childhood obesity.
To bring about lasting change, campaign groups like Bite Back are focusing on the concrete and encouraging the largest manufacturers of FMCG products to take small steps towards improving the nutrition of their child-friendly portfolios. We should encourage them to take the plunge. By launching a large-scale attack, they risk further alienation.
And, of course, we need to help the manufacturer by suggesting what steps they can take to improve.
