Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all of which were Not upheld.
Ad description
A TV ad, a newspaper website ad, a YouTube video, and a Facebook post for the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board’s (AHDB) “Eat Balanced” campaign, seen in January 2021:
a. The TV ad began with a scene of an empty Central London street followed by a close-up of metal shutters of a closed store and then green open fields featuring tractors and cows grazing and an open field containing shelters for pigs, with a voiceover that stated, “We’ve all got a lot on our plates right now, but here’s something you’ll want to make room for. The story of a food so natural, it takes the rain from the sky and plants we humans cannot eat, and turns it into something wonderful.” Rain falling on long blades of grass appeared on-screen. Superimposed text later in the ad stated “Red meat and dairy are a source of B12 and protein … B12 helps reduce tiredness and fatigue. Protein contributes to the maintenance of normal bones.” The voiceover continued, “Essential nutrients our bodies need to help us stay healthy” while a scene showed a silhouette of children running through fields. The voiceover stated “Meat” over a scene showing meat patties being fried, followed by “Dairy” while cheese was shown being grated. Superimposed text stated “A varied and balanced diet alongside a healthy lifestyle are recommended for good health”. A plate containing a piece of meat on a bed of rice, greens, kidney beans, sweetcorn and tomatoes appeared alongside superimposed text which stated “Eat Balanced” and “for more stories visit WeEatBalanced.com”. Logos for the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board and Red Tractor Certified Standards appeared at the bottom right-hand corner of the screen, while the voiceover stated, “Enjoy the food you eat. Eat balanced”.
b. A large banner ad on a website featured the headline “TO B12 OR NOT TO B12?” against a backdrop of pieces of meat and peppers. Further text stated “Beef, pork, lamb and milk contain vitamin B12, an essential nutrient not naturally present in the vegan diet. Click to discover more”. Logos for the “Eat Balanced” campaign, the ADHB, and Red Tractor Certified Standards appeared in the bottom right corner, and small print text stated “Enjoy as part of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle.”
c. The YouTube video posted by ‘We Eat Balanced’, contained the same claims as ad (a) but featured a different plate containing steak and vegetables. Text in the video description stated “Open Beef Steak Sandwich and a glass of milk. An ideal diet is one that offers variety, nourishment and enjoyment whilst remaining in harmony with the environment. To keep you and your family healthy it’s best to follow a balanced diet. Meat and dairy naturally provide nutrients, including the essential vitamin B12 not naturally present in a vegan diet. Enjoy the food you eat. Eat balanced”.
d. the Facebook post by ‘We Eat Balanced’, included a video containing the same claims as ad (a). The caption stated “AHDB has started the #WeEatBalanced conversation to set out evidence about the benefits of the UK farming sector and to help consumers make an informed personal choice on diet and nutrition. We all have different dietary requirements, family needs and budgets and we are presenting a choice to enjoy in such difficult times as we look for meal inspiration”.
Issue
487 complainants, including Humane League UK, The Vegan Society, Compassion in World Farming UK, Four Paws, PETA, Surge Campaigning CIC, Brinsley Animal Rescue and Viva!, challenged whether:
1. ads (a), (b), (c) and (d), were misleading because they implied that consumption of meat and dairy was required in order to eat a healthy, balanced diet when there was evidence to suggest that was not the case;
2. ads (b) and (c) misleadingly implied that consumption of meat and dairy was required in order to obtain vitamin B12; and
3. ads (a), (c) and (d) misleadingly implied that livestock used for meat in the UK were typically outdoor grazed and had a minimal environmental impact when that was not the case.
Response
1. The AHDB said that they were an executive non-departmental UK public body, sponsored by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and funded by farmers, growers and other parties in the supply chain. They stated that they wanted to address common consumer misconceptions about the sustainability of red meat and dairy produced in Britain when compared to global livestock production and other sectors in the UK and to highlight the role red meat and dairy played in a balanced diet.
The AHDB said that their intention with ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) was to raise awareness of the nutrients meat and dairy foods could offer if eaten as part of a healthy and balanced diet. They said they used qualifying statements to promote a varied diet and to clarify that meat and dairy consumption was not required. They said that the ads directed consumers to more detailed information by providing links to the website weeatbalanced.com. They said that red meat and dairy were included in the Government’s Eatwell Guide, which they used as a guide, and in line with National Diet & Nutrition Surveys, they also sought to inform consumers and provide a balanced view regarding the health effects of consuming red meat. The website outlined limits set on red meat consumption by the NHS. For those reason, the AHDB maintained that the ads were not misleading.
2. The AHDB said that the claims in ads (b) and (c) did not omit material information and that steps were taken to avoid consumers being misled. Their intention was to raise awareness that foods of plant origin were not natural sources of vitamin B12 and this was substantiated by the NHS website and the Vegan Society’s website. Ad (c) used images of farming, landscapes and animals in the UK to show that red meat and dairy were a natural source of vitamin B12 and it was factually correct that vitamin B12 was not synthesized in the body and therefore needed to be present in the diet. They said that the NHS listed meat, milk and cheese as sources of vitamin B12. The ads did not claim that red meat and dairy were the only sources for protein and vitamin B12 and they did not consider that the average consumer would have understood that to be the case from the ads.
The AHDB said that the claims did not go beyond the AHDB guides to understanding nutrition and health claims regulations for beef, lamb and pork, on which they had been given Assured Advice by their Primary Authority. They said that the British Nutrition Foundation had advised them that "natural" or "naturally" could be regarded as meaning without “refining, chemical extraction, genetic modification, cloning or with addition of additives or fortificants”, which reflected the guidance set out by the Food Standards Agency.
3. The AHDB said that the ads did not omit material information or seek to mislead consumers, and that consumers were directed in the ads to the weeatbalanced.com website to obtain more detailed information than the ads could provide within limited time and space. The website defined sustainable production for British livestock in terms of carbon footprint, water, land use and food waste, and these areas were broadly understood by consumers when talking about the environment. The website contained links to the sources for each of the claims to enable consumers to find out more. The AHDB said it was factually correct that UK livestock was typically grazed outdoors. Red meat production systems in the UK were predominantly outdoor, land-based systems as a result of the UK climate and landscape. All sheep in Britain were housed outdoors and 95% of all cattle were outdoors from spring to autumn. They said that the UK had the largest population of outdoor pigs in Europe, with over 40% of breeding females outdoors. They maintained that the imagery and wording used in the ads, namely that UK livestock production was land-based, and used foods humans could not eat and rainwater, to produce meat and milk, reflected typical UK production systems in beef, lamb and dairy and typical commercial outdoor pig units.
The AHDB cited a report by the Centre for Innovation Excellence in Livestock, which they said stated that the carbon footprint of UK beef was half the global average, while the footprint of UK dairy was a third lower than the global average. They said that the report also stated that all UK livestock emitted 6% of total UK greenhouse gas emissions, compared to 28% for transport, 23% for energy, 18% for businesses and 15% for homes. They said that the UK's topography and climate limited the types of animal and plant species that could be reared for food; 65% of the UK had permanent grassland or rough grazing. Raising animals for meat and milk therefore made optimal use of the UK’s natural resources. They said that well-managed grazing lands provided habitats for shelter, feeding and breeding, and helped enhance ecosystems and biodiversity and that removal of livestock in certain UK landscapes could have detrimental impacts on land quality and flora and fauna biodiversity. They said that cattle and sheep predominantly fed on grass, and that very little of their diet was edible for humans. Just under 50% of pig diets were made up of human food by- and co-products and the inclusion of soya in pig diets was around 10% and rainwater made up 87% of the water footprint for cattle, sheep and pigs.
AHDB said they believed that the average consumer would infer from the ads and supporting information at weeatbalanced.com that British meat and dairy production, when compared to global meat production and the environmental impact of other sectors in the UK, was sustainably produced and environmentally beneficial. They felt that the ads were therefore not misleading.
1. & 3. Clearcast said that they had considered the TV ad and supporting evidence from the AHDB carefully and asked for several amendments to the ad before they were satisfied that it was acceptable. They believed that the TV ad explained that meat and dairy provided essential nutrients to humans in order to stay healthy. They said that as this was a general health claim, it was accompanied by a specific health claim super in accordance with the relevant rules. The ad explained that meat and dairy farming was reliant on natural elements like rain, grass and the sun for the production of essential nutrients like B12; humans on a diet of grass and rain water would not be capable of manufacturing such nutrients. The TV ad showed a plate of food incorporating these ingredients showing how they contributed towards a balanced and varied diet and was followed by the We Eat Balanced website, which offered advice on recipes, how to eat healthily and sustainably and how to cut waste. They said that the ad did not state that meat and dairy were the only ways of achieving a healthy balanced diet, rather that they contained some of the essential nutrients that a healthy, balanced diet required. They said that the ad showed scenes of farms and nature with cows grazing in a field as advocated by Red Tractor standards. The ad made no claims about how livestock in the UK were grazed and made no environmental claims. The ads used typical depictions of UK farm life to advertise authorised health claims for their products which conformed to the BCAP and EFSA codes. For those reasons, Clearcast said that they did not believe the ads were misleading and they considered that all the claims had been substantiated.
Assessment
1. Not upheld
Ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) included claims such as “Essential nutrients our bodies need to help us stay healthy”, “Eat Balanced” and “A varied and balanced diet alongside a healthy lifestyle are recommended for good health” alongside shots of different meals including meat and dairy, among other ingredients. They also included nutrition and health claims such as “Beef, pork, lamb and milk contain vitamin B12, an essential nutrient not naturally present in the vegan diet” and “Red meat and dairy are a source of B12 and protein … B12 helps reduce tiredness and fatigue. Protein contributes to the maintenance of normal bones”. Ad (c) included the claim “To keep you and your family healthy it’s best to follow a balanced diet. Meat and dairy naturally provide nutrients, including the essential vitamin B12 not naturally present in a vegan diet”. Ad (d) referred to the “choice” and “personal choice” of consumers to include different types of foods in their diets. We understood that meat and dairy products contained sufficient quantities of vitamin B12 and protein that the nutrition and health claims included in the ads were permitted to be made. Overall, we considered that the ads would be understood by consumers to mean that essential nutrients required for humans could be obtained from meat and dairy foods as part of a healthy and balanced diet.
We referred to the NHS Eatwell Guide, which defined government recommendations on eating healthily and achieving a balanced diet. The Guide recommended eating protein, which could come from meat or from other sources, such as nuts and pulses. It also recommended consuming dairy or dairy alternatives, such as soy milk.
The ads did not state that consumers could not obtain a balanced and healthy diet unless they ate meat or dairy. We did not consider that consumers would interpret the ad to mean that consumption of meat and dairy was required to be healthy, but rather that meat and dairy products provided a choice of food options that could contribute to an overall healthy, varied diet. There was nothing in the ads to suggest that consumers should consume meat or dairy in proportions that went beyond NHS health and nutrition advice.
We concluded that ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) did not give a misleading impression that meat and dairy were required for a healthy and balanced diet.
On that point, we investigated the ads under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
3.3
3.3
Ofcom must ensure that the standards from time to time in force under this section include:
a) minimum standards applicable to all programmes included in television and radio services; and
b) such other standards applicable to particular descriptions of programmes, or of television and radio services, as appeared to them appropriate for securing the standards objectives."
Section
3.9
3.9
Broadcasters must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that the audience is likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
5).
(Misleading advertising) and
3.7
3.7
Advertisements must not falsely imply that the advertiser is acting as a consumer or for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession. Advertisements must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context.
(Substantiation) and BCAP Code rules
3.1
3.1
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
3.2
3.2
Advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that consumers need in context to make informed decisions about whether or how to buy a product or service. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead consumers depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the advertisement is constrained by time or space, the measures that the advertiser takes to make that information available to consumers by other means.
(Misleading advertising) and
3.9
3.9
Broadcasters must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that the audience is likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation), but did not find them in breach.
2. Not upheld
We considered that consumers would understand the claims and “Beef, pork, lamb and milk contain vitamin B12, an essential nutrient not naturally present in the vegan diet” alongside the claim “Enjoy as part of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle” in ad (b) to mean that vitamin B12 was an essential nutrient that was only found naturally in beef, pork, lamb and milk, and could not be found naturally in a vegan diet. While we noted that some consumers might interpret the claim “TO B12 OR NOT TO B12?”, in isolation, to suggest a binary choice between eating meat and dairy and obtaining vitamin B12, or not eating those food groups and not obtaining the nutrient as a result, in the context of the ad we considered it was likely to be understood as a play on words referring to the fact that some foods were natural sources of B12.
We considered that the claims “To keep you and your family healthy it’s best to follow a balanced diet. Meat and dairy naturally provide nutrients, including the essential vitamin B12 not naturally present in a vegan diet” alongside the claim “Enjoy the food you eat. Eat balanced” in ad (c) would be understood in the same way as in ad (b).
We understood that beef, pork, lamb and milk were natural sources of vitamin B12. We referred to the NHS advice on vegetarian and vegan diets, which stated that vitamin B12 was only found naturally in foods from animal sources, and that because sources of vitamin B12 for vegans were limited, supplements or fortified foods might be needed.
We therefore considered that it was factually accurate to state that vitamin B12 was not naturally present in a vegan diet. We considered that consumers would understand that while the nutrient was not naturally present in plant-based foods, it could readily be obtained through supplements and a variety of fortified vegan foods, and therefore the ad was unlikely to give the impression that it was not possible to consume sufficient levels of B12 while following a vegan diet.
We concluded that ads (b) and (c) did not give a misleading impression that eating meat and dairy was required to obtain vitamin B12.
On that point, we investigated the ads under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
3.3
3.3
Ofcom must ensure that the standards from time to time in force under this section include:
a) minimum standards applicable to all programmes included in television and radio services; and
b) such other standards applicable to particular descriptions of programmes, or of television and radio services, as appeared to them appropriate for securing the standards objectives."
Section
3.9
3.9
Broadcasters must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that the audience is likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
5).
(Misleading advertising) and
3.7
3.7
Advertisements must not falsely imply that the advertiser is acting as a consumer or for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession. Advertisements must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context.
(Substantiation), but did not find them in breach.
3. Not upheld
The video shown in ads (a), (c) and (d) included scenery featuring rolling fields with cattle and sheep grazing, an open field with pigs and livestock shelters, rain falling on grass, and images of meals including dairy products and meat. The ad specifically referred to beef, pork, lamb and dairy. We considered that consumers would understand that the images of livestock were representative of how some cattle, sheep and pigs were farmed in the UK. There was nothing to suggest that all cattle, pigs and sheep in the UK were kept in similar conditions, in terms of their access to outdoor space. Neither did the video refer to any other type of farmed animal, such as chickens. We further noted that the predominant theme of the video was the health and nutritional attributes of meat and dairy, and different ways they could be incorporated into people’s diets, and that was what consumers were likely to be focused on.
According to the Government Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ (Defra) Cattle Farm Practices survey from April 2019, 87% of farms with cattle in the UK used a mix of housed and grazing systems for their cattle. Furthermore, we understood that many pigs in the UK were kept in outdoor systems like those shown in the ad, and that the majority of sheep were housed outdoors. Therefore, we considered that the images of animals in the ad, as they were likely to be understood by consumers, were unlikely to mislead.
We considered that the claim “a food so natural that it takes the rain from the sky and the plants we humans cannot eat” alongside the scenery of rolling fields, and rain falling on grass, was likely to be understood to mean that the animals in the ads converted water and energy from plants such as grass into simple foods that did not contain additives and reached consumers in a state that had been subject to minimal processing. Given that the foodstuffs being promoted were unprocessed beef, pork, and lamb, and dairy products of a traditional nature subject to minimal processing such as milk and cheese, we considered they were likely to be in line with consumer expectations of “natural”.
We noted that some complainants considered that the description “natural” was misleading because they believed that certain farming practices, such as the removal of calves from their mothers and the docking of pigs’ tails, were not “natural”. Other complainants believed the claim “natural” implied that meat and dairy farming in the UK had a minimal environmental impact, or was an essential part of the ecological system, particularly in combination with the references to “rain from the sky” and “plants we humans cannot eat”. We understood that the AHDB had conducted a market research survey of 1,200 people to assess consumer perception of their ad campaign. Among the participants there was a targeted sub-group of 200 people who were considering reducing their meat and dairy consumption and used social media channels with an interest in health and ethical living and 35% of those 200 people considered that dairy could be described as "produced in a sustainable way" after having seen the ad, which was an increase of eight percentage points from 27% before the campaign. However, we did not consider that research was sufficient to indicate that the average consumer would understand the ads to mean that farming was “sustainable”.
We considered that the average consumer was likely to understand the claim in the context of the nature of the resulting food, rather than the lifecycle of livestock or the impact of farming on the environment. Consumers would likely understand that lives of farmed animals differed significantly in many ways from how they would originally have lived in the wild. We understood that the majority of the diet of cattle and sheep in the UK was made up of grass and that pig feed also included crops and by-products that could not be eaten by humans. In any case, there was nothing in the ad to suggest that those animals exclusively ate plants that could not be eaten by humans. We considered that the ads did not go so far as to suggest that the scenes shown were representative of all livestock farming in the UK, or that farming had a minimal environmental impact.
We concluded that ads (a), (c) and (d) were not misleading.
On that point, we investigated the ads under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
3.3
3.3
Ofcom must ensure that the standards from time to time in force under this section include:
a) minimum standards applicable to all programmes included in television and radio services; and
b) such other standards applicable to particular descriptions of programmes, or of television and radio services, as appeared to them appropriate for securing the standards objectives."
Section
3.9
3.9
Broadcasters must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that the audience is likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
5).
(Misleading advertising) and
3.7
3.7
Advertisements must not falsely imply that the advertiser is acting as a consumer or for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession. Advertisements must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context.
(Substantiation) and BCAP Code rules
3.1
3.1
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
3.2
3.2
Advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that consumers need in context to make informed decisions about whether or how to buy a product or service. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead consumers depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the advertisement is constrained by time or space, the measures that the advertiser takes to make that information available to consumers by other means.
(Misleading advertising) and
3.9
3.9
Broadcasters must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that the audience is likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation), but did not find them in breach.
Action
No further action required.
