No abstract

Objectives. To examine the prevalence and magnitude of price promotions in a major Australian supermarket and how they differ between core (healthy) and discretionary (less healthy) food categories. Methods. Weekly online price data (regular retail price, discount price, and promotion type) on 1579 foods were collected for 1 year (April 2017 to April 2018) from the largest Australian supermarket chain. Products audited were classified according to Australian Dietary Guidelines definitions of core and discretionary foods and according to their Health Star Rating (a government-endorsed nutrient profiling scheme). Results. On average, 15.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 14.7%, 15.3%) of core foods and 28.8% (95% CI = 28.6%, 29.0%) of discretionary foods were price promoted during a given week. Average discounts were −15.4% (95% CI = −16.4, −14.4) for core products and −25.9% (95% CI = −26.8, −25.1) for discretionary products. The percentage of products on price promotion and the size of the discount were larger for products with a lower Health Star Rating (P < .05). Conclusions. Price promotions were more prevalent and greater in magnitude for discretionary foods than for core foods. Policies to reduce the prevalence and magnitude of price promotions on discretionary foods could improve the healthiness of food purchased from supermarkets.

Objective: Price promotions are used to influence purchases and represent an important target for obesity prevention policy. However, no long-term contemporary data on the extent and frequency of supermarket price promotions exists. We aimed to evaluate the frequency, magnitude and weekly variation of beverage price promotions available online at two major Australian supermarket chains over 50 weeks. Methods:Beverages were categorised into four policy-relevant categories (sugar-sweetened beverages, artificially-sweetened beverages, flavoured milk and 100% juice, milk and water). The proportional contribution of each category to the total number of price proportions, the proportion of price promotions within the available product category, the mean discount, and weekly variation in price promotions were calculated.Results: For Coles and Woolworths respectively, 26% and 30% of all beverages were price promoted in any given week. Sugar-sweetened beverages made up the greatest proportion of all price promotions (Coles: 46%, Woolworths: 49%). Within each product category, the proportion of sugar-sweetened and artificially-sweetened beverages that were price promoted was similar, higher than the other categories and reasonably constant over time. Diet drinks and sugar-sweetened soft drinks were most heavily discounted (by 29-40%). Conclusions:Beverage price promotions are used extensively in Australian supermarkets, undermining efforts to promote healthy population diets. Implications for public health:Policies restricting price promotions on sugar-sweetened beverages are likely to be an important part of strategies to reduce obesity and improve population nutrition.

Background: Concerns have been raised that health and societal causes surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic were misappropriated by companies to promote their unhealthy products to vulnerable populations during a time of increased stress and hardship (i.e., COVID-washing). Social media is a common medium for unhealthy foods and beverage marketing due to lack of regulation and low levels of monitoring.Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the timing, nature and extent of COVID-washing on public social media accounts by New Zealand's major food and drink brands in the initial stage of the pandemic after the first case was detected in New Zealand and when stay-at-home lockdown restrictions (Level 4 and 3 Alert levels) were in place.Methods: A content analysis of social media posts from February to May 2020 by the twenty largest confectionery, snacks, non-alcoholic beverages, and quick-service restaurant (fast-food) brands was undertaken. COVID-19 related posts were identified and classified to investigate the timing, themes and engagement with social media marketing campaigns, flagging those that may breach New Zealand's Advertising Standards.Results: 14 of 20 unhealthy food and drink brands referenced COVID-19 in posts during the 4-month period, peaking during nationwide lockdown restrictions. Over a quarter of all posts by the 14 brands (n = 372, 27.2%) were COVID-19 themed. Fast-food brands were most likely to use COVID-19 themed posts (n = 251/550 posts, 46%). Fast-food brands also had the highest number of posts overall during the pandemic and the highest engagement. The most commonly-used theme, present in 36% of all social media posts referring to COVID-19, was to draw on feelings of community support during this challenging time. Suggesting brand-related isolation activities was also common (23%), and the message that “consumption helps with coping” (22%). Six posts were found to potentially breach one of New Zealand's advertising standards codes by promoting excessive consumption or targeting children.Conclusion: COVID-washing was used by unhealthy food and drinks brands to increase brand loyalty and encourage consumption. The current Advertising Standards system is ineffective and must be replaced with a government-led approach to effectively regulate social media advertising to protect all New Zealanders, particularly in times of crisis.

No abstract