• by David Kaplan , January 7, 2005

In this, the age of the American obesity crisis, the nation's moms expect food marketers to help them and their kids eat nutritious and non-obese threatening foods. That onus presents new pitfalls and opportunities for advertisers, the results of an online study by Interpublic Group's Universal-McCann says.

According to the report, "Nutrition and Obesity: What Does Mom Really Think," food companies seen as taking a lead in ensuring that kids eat a balanced diet, especially out of the home, will be viewed by moms - who still figure highly in deciding what the family eats - as valuable partners in this area of child upbringing.

"This should also result in moms continuing their belief that food manufacturers should not be subject to government interference in areas such as advertising restrictions," said Jim Kite, UM's global research director, who prepared the report as part of the agency's "Creating Demand" analytical series. "Indeed, our survey revealed that companies active in this space are already seeing some dividends."

For example, when asked to list companies they believe "have been particularly active in encouraging a healthy diet and healthy living," McDonald's and Subway, with their new menus and messaging, received the third and fourth highest top of-mind answers.

Overall, according to the respondents, the cause for America's weight problem is not seen as one of gluttony, but rather inactivity. Nearly 70 percent of respondents said that they believe the increase in obesity is due to lack of exercise, not overeating.

Nevertheless, half of those surveyed deem that both fast food companies and food manufacturers themselves bear some of the responsibility for obesity. The same amount would prefer to see foods packaged in smaller sizes, to help with portion control. Soft drink manufacturers are held at least partially responsible by 37 percent of the respondents.

And while 40 percent of the respondents "completely agree" that there is too much advertising of junk food to children now, only 6 percent are totally behind an outright government ban on it. One figure that should also make marketers breathe a sigh of relief is the finding that 65 percent agree that advertisers aren't to blame for poor diets, that it's the responsibility of parents to educate their children about healthy eating.

Using our representative online research tool called Intuition, between June 25 and June 28, 2004, a sample of 502 U.S. mothers with children up to the age of 16 were questioned.

The report, which is based on online survey that sampled 502 U.S. mothers with children up to the age of 16 between June 25th and June 28th, 2004, is evidence that there are opportunities for brands to "own and control" the out-of-home healthy eating experience and by doing so, becoming mother's trusted partner, Kite said.

"It appears that linking product consumption to promotional redemption activity, such as coupons or prizes, could prove counterproductive and negative," he advised. "For example, getting kids to eat candy bars in return for school books would not be as effective as the straight sponsoring of a sporting event, other activities or charitable giving."

Other advice included in the reports findings are that products that are acceptable for moms and "cool" for kids will become the winners. Furthermore, brands need to explore targeting mothers and kids during their shared time, to get "healthy" and "cool" messages across, e.g., the time spent in the car going to or from school or other activities.

In terms of practical aspects of media placement, point-of-purchase could provide more useful nutritional information and education, which could help promote and encourage the notion that active lifestyles is not in contradiction with food manufacturing.