More than half of the UK's most senior marketers believe current regulations around high fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) food and drink are not fit for purpose and they would back tougher restrictions, according to research released by the Chartered Institute of Marketing.
Chief marketing officers also raised concerns about alcohol, gambling, and environmental impact.
CIM’s research showed that 54% supported stronger marketing regulation for HFSS, 72% backed tougher rules for betting and 76% wanted to see more restrictions for products that damage the environment.
A smaller group, 34%, wanted to see stricter rules applied to alcohol marketing.
Generally, 58% backed more restrictions on products aimed at children.
The CMO 50 report was put together after the CIM quizzed 50 senior marketers from a mix of corporations, charities and marketing agencies, with two-thirds of respondents in-house and the remainder agency side.
The findings about HFSS are especially significant as the Government’s decision last week to introduce a ban on advertising such products online at any time and on TV before 9pm – with some exceptions – has been greeted with anger by much of the ad industry.
Overall, CIM said: “Just 26% believe the current regulatory regime for alcohol, gambling, HFSS products and environmentally damaging goods is fit for purpose, and the majority would back rules equivalent to those for cigarettes to restrict the marketing of potentially harmful goods and services.”
The research unearthed some positive aspects to post-pandemic life for brands.
With the UK's re-emergence from lockdown now a distinct possibility, marketers collectively scored the prospects for the future of their organisations at 81 out of 100, despite the fact that 57% had marketing budgets cut in the past 12 months.
Nearly three-quarters (71%) of in-house marketers believed that Covid uncertainty had actively helped the reputation of their brands, while just over half (52%) believed that the marketing sector was stronger now than five years ago. Just 20% believed it was weaker.
Issues around brand safety and advertising on social networks that carry hateful content were clearly top of mind for many marketers.
The vast majority (92%) of those interviewed believed that brands should pull ads from social media that fail to protect users and 86% felt platforms should do more, while 44% felt the protection of social media users falls outside their remits.
Overall optimism for the economy scored 62 out of 100; specifically for the marketing economy it scored 81. There was little variation between in-house and agency roles.
Chris Daly, the CIM's chief executive, said: "Marketing leaders calling for restrictions on marketing may seem counter-intuitive, but it reflects a clear shift in our society towards purpose driven marketing.
"Marketers have been at the forefront of helping the nation adapt to the strictures of lockdown and, in doing so, have built stronger relationships with consumers. That hard-won reputational boost has the potential to accelerate economic growth as we emerge from lockdown, and professional marketers are rightly wary of loose regulatory controls allowing a few bad apples to sour the trust of consumers."