Frances Black (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 173 takes the language from Part 5 of the Bill about how the public health interests of children must be a key consideration of how the media regulator regulates advertising and transposes it to the section covering digital media. At this point, I would like to thank Kathryn Reilly of the Irish Heart Foundation for her assistance with this amendment.

One of the important features of the Bill is its attempt to bring the regulation of conventional and digital media into the common legislative framework. It is a great step forward but this Bill, as drafted, does not go far enough to create parity between digital and conventional media. This amendment will make sure the public health interests of children are explicitly considered by the regulators overseeing the digital sphere. This is particularly important because young people are spending more and more time in digital spaces and consuming digital media. They are watching less conventional media. It is important that regulations that govern advertising reflect this reality.

The online world is run on advertising. It is totally pervasive. Online advertising can be discreet, explicit and subtle. It can be incorporated into online content through sponsorships and product placement. This obscures the distinctions between entertainment, information and advertising. These blurred lines make online advertising more effective, particularly for younger or more vulnerable consumers who are not equipped with the media literacy and critical capacity of the standard adult. Given the huge amount of time young people spend consuming this digital content, as well as the insidiously effective mechanisms at play with digital advertising, it is vital that online regulators are empowered to take action against harmful advertising with the public health interests of children in mind.

This legislation already contains that brilliant language that gives due weight to the importance of protecting children's health. This amendment is a rather modest one which seeks to replicate the Bill’s already effective language in the section that covers digital media. I hope the Minister will accept this amendment, which will strengthen the Bill and will ensure parity for regulation across different types of content. Amendment No. 176 is a copy of a provision in Part 5, Chapter 3, dealing with media services codes and media services rules that may prohibit the advertising of high fat, salt and sugar foods and drinks in commercial communications on media services, recognising the “general public health interests of children”. This was part of the transposition of the audiovisual media services directive. The Bill already makes provision for restrictions on junk food and drink advertising on media services in the public health interests of children. This amendment would simply extend that to online services. It is using the text of the Bill to extend protections to children from harmful marketing into the online world. It also includes identical restrictions on the advertisement of gambling and alcohol. The evidence is unequivocal that the marketing of nutritionally poor food affects children’s consumption preferences, purchase requests, consumption choices and, ultimately, their health. Bearing in mind the high rates of child obesity and related non-communicable diseases throughout the European Union, the effective regulation of marketing practices that incentivise the consumption of nutritionally poor food is urgently needed.

The imposition of online restrictions on the marketing of junk food and drinks to protect children from harm is even more warranted as the marketing strategies used to promote such products are increasingly integrated, immersive and personalised, and therefore likely to cause harm and create long-term behavioural patterns. General comment No. 25 of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child in respect of the digital environment calls on states to make the best interests of the child a primary consideration when regulating advertising and other forms of marketing addressed and accessible to children. We are seeing the deployment of a vast array of big data and adtech tools to tap into online cultural spaces, and to infiltrate them with powerful promotions for some of the unhealthiest products on the market. There exists a large, integrated, data-driven digital marketing system, fuelled by big data, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. This has created a powerful, pervasive and immersive digital environment that is harming children’s health, furthering health inequities, and contributing to increasingly higher levels of disease in the population.

The Covid-19 pandemic triggered a dramatic increase in people’s screen time. Children and teens whose schools closed relied on YouTube for educational videos, attending virtual classes on Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Google Classroom, and flocking to TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram for entertainment and social interaction. This constant immersion in digital culture has exposed them to a steady flow of marketing for unhealthy products, much of it under the radar of parents and teachers. Unfortunately, the Bill as currently drafted does not appreciate the key role online marketing plays in eroding children’s health. Today’s youth, from infancy through to adolescence, are at the epicentre of an exploding digital media and marketing landscape. This Bill provides a unique opportunity to address this through amendment of Part 11, Chapter 3, on online safety codes. By not including a ban on alcohol advertising to children in the online safety and media regulation Bill, we would allow an unacceptable gap in protection to continue. There is an illogical reality where in real world settings we have laws to ensure there are no alcohol ads in proximity to children’s environments such as schools, playgrounds, etc. but in the digital space, where children are spending increasing quantities of time, we are allowing the alcohol industry to put ads in the palms of the hands of our children 24-7.

This amendment is in the spirit of the Bill. It aims to put an end to the day of the Internet operating as a wild west where standards are lower and anything goes. There is a clear gap in how we choose to protect children from harmful advertising. The way to remedy this is by way of this amendment which specifically prohibits the advertising of alcohol, gambling and high fat, salt and sugar foods in the online spaces that children inhabit. Only by naming these harmful products can we ensure that this will be enforced. We know that advertising these products to children is wrong and this should not be a battle that needs fighting.