After 9 years, the ban is still standing strong
Feature by Isaac Dadzie
On February 1, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a document consisting of Guidelines for the Advertisement of Foods.
However, one specific guideline set a path for controversy. Guideline 3.2.10 stated that "No well-known personality or professional shall be used in alcoholic beverage advertising."
This meant that celebrities, athletes, and other popular individuals were barred from promoting or endorsing alcoholic beverages.
The FDA, through its various spokespersons, contended that the guideline was necessary to prevent minors from consuming alcohol due to the influence of these celebrities.
But herein lies the predicament: a concerned individual may ask the following questions: How did they know this? Are these laws or guidelines based on empirical facts and data? Do we even have data to support such decisions?
Let's take a look at the United States of America.
In the mid-20th century, the United States identified cigarette smoking as a growing public health crisis.
Even though studies had been released in the 1930s and 1940s, the 1964 Surgeon General's Report, a comprehensive review of over 7,000 scientific articles, linked cigarette smoking to lung cancer, heart disease, and a host of other health problems.
With this evidence, the US government took decisive action to curb the influence of cigarette advertising.
The Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965 required health warnings on cigarette packs, and the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act of 1970 furthered these efforts by banning cigarette ads on TV and radio.
According to the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library, evidence suggested that advertising played a crucial role in encouraging youth to start smoking, and the ban aimed to disrupt this influence.
Now, let's come back to Ghana, where there has been some research identifying rising cases of underage drinking in some parts of Ghana.
The most recent research on "Underage Alcohol Consumption in Ghana: A Threat to Child Welfare and Development" by Sylvester Kyei-Gyamfi was used by some alcoholic beverage manufacturers in their corporate social responsibility efforts.
More than six in ten children in the country have ever been drunk after consuming alcohol, and more than half of the children who reported ever taking alcohol were first initiated into consumption by friends.
He said the results showed that despite the existence of law, policy, and national institutional mechanisms in place, efforts made to regulate the sale and consumption of alcohol among children had been a challenge.
However, no numbers were cited to suggest that children were influenced by media advertisements, more notably, celebrity advertisements.
Infact, the research by Kyei-Gyamfi found that more than half of the children who reported ever taking alcohol were first initiated into consumption by friends, not celebrities.
This is not to rubbish the fact that celebrity voices do influence children, but where is the data?
Where is the data to prove that children got into drinking because they saw Shatta Wale or Stonebwoy doing so? And where is the data to prove that underage drinking has been reduced because of the ban? What happened to data-driven decision-making?
So, yes, a common-sense law like the ban on celebrity advertisements may resonate with the public.
But when you're looking at a law that could affect the income of the stakeholders of a specific sector without any data to show that such a law is actually 'working,' then what's the point of it?
Underage drinking still exists, advertisements of alcoholic beverages are still bombarding us, and very little sensitization efforts are taking place. Meanwhile, celebrities who may benefit from brand deals are stranded.
But the court has made its decision; the ban is still in place, and the most we can do is talk about it, write about it, and move on with our lives as usual.
But when a new law is being brought up, remember to ask the question: where is the data?
Watch the latest episode of Moans and Cuddles here;
