Beer Marketer's Insights
A handful of recent studies of the health effects of alcohol consumption show once again that drinkers, especially women, need to weigh benefits with potential risks. Good news: moderate consumption continues to be linked with cardiovascular benefits (blood sugar control, lower inflammation of the arteries) and better cognitive performance among elderly drinkers. A widely reported study also found wine drinkers to have much lower risk of dementia than abstainers. On the other hand, the same dementia study suggested beer drinking increased dementia risk. Meanwhile, two new studies appeared to confirm that drinking raises slightly women
After many years of urgent debate, policy interventions and hand-wringing over how best to describe and deal with alcohol consumption on college campuses, annual polls show little recent change in drinking rates, at least not on a national basis. In 2001, 4.7% of college students reported consuming alcohol daily, according to the University of Michigan
Diageo Seeks Unified Efforts Across Tiers and Products; Tax Equivalence Not on Its Agenda</P>
Another suggestion from Guy Smith about how the industry can improve its image among the public: "We believe we should be ready to find ways to work together
Despite decades of research that indicate the health benefits of moderate drinking, less than half of American adults believe that beer or liquor "can be part of a healthy, balanced life." That was one disturbing result of a recent poll done for Diageo, presented by its executive VP of external affairs Guy Smith at the Beer Insights Seminar in early November. Just 39% believe distilled spirits can be part of a healthy, balanced life, and only a slightly higher 45% view beer positively. (Nearly 60% thought wine could be part of a healthy, balanced life.) Another negative number: only 40% had a positive view of the alcohol beverage industry, compared to an 85% "approval rating" for the milk industry, and a 70% positive rating for auto manufacturers. The same poll also found that just 43% said it was "okay" for adults to drink every day," Smith said. On a more positive note, there aren
A National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel received $500,000 in federal funding to study programs to address underage drinking, including a possible media component. Its findings are scheduled to be released in May 2003. The problem: outspoken public health advocates dominate the 12-person panel. That
Notes from ICAP Meeting
The most "libertarian" voice at the ICAP conference (by far), one who fully embraced personal responsibility for drinking behavior and advocated little or no government interference with drinkers and/or the industry, was a UK doctor, not an industry member. On the theme of youth, Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick criticized the "infantilizing of adults," including those 18-20 yrs old, by some of the public health rhetoric that leads to "degradation" of the rights of the individual
California’s Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) program "was associated with a substantial reduction in both alcohol-related and non-alcohol related crashes" in its first year, according to a recent report. Alcohol-related crash rates (per 100,000 drivers) among 16-year-olds dropped by 16% in the first year. Alcohol-related crash rates were down another 13% in the second year. Crash rates of 16-year-olds that had not been drinking dropped 13.6% and 14.7% in the first and second years following the adoption of GDL. Meanwhile, the alcohol-related crash rates of 19-year-olds that were not affected by GDL laws increased 6%. California’s GDL program prohibits 16 year-olds from driving between midnight and 5:00 am, and from having other minors as passengers unless accompanied by someone at least 25 years of age. "Since more alcohol-related crashes occur late at night," the study’s author noted, the time restrictions were expected to reduce nighttime alcohol-related crash rates. But, he added, "the law also significantly reduced teen daytime alcohol-related crashes." He attributed that to the restriction prohibiting drivers from driving with other teens in the vehicle. The California results are notable because prior studies have found a positive association between GDL programs and total crash rates among teens, but not a statistically significant link to drinking and driving.
Elsewhere, in Nova Scotia, crash rates dropped 51% during the first six months of driving for beginners aged 16 or 17 after graduated licensing laws were implemented. For the first full year with GDL restrictions in place, crash rates for those aged 16-17 dropped 9%; they fell 11% in the second year. As in California, crash rates among older drivers not subject to any GDL restrictions increased 4%. Ref 2
A widely-publicized new study slams the marketing practices of major distillers and brewers, claiming their magazine advertisements target youth: "Young people are overexposed to alcohol advertising, and numerous alcohol advertisers have chosen to place their promotional messages in magazines with disproportionately large youth audiences," declared The Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY), a Georgetown University group that monitors alcohol beverage marketing. CAMY
Forging partnerships—between the alcohol beverage industry, relevant government/non-government entities and public health officials – remains a key ICAP mission, and there was plenty of talk about partnership process at the Dublin meeting. There was comparatively little talk of specific successful partnerships, though a recent ICAP survey listed "effective" industry-government-public health partnerships in a dozen nations. Several participants noted ongoing programs in Quebec, Germany and elsewhere. On the other hand, several speakers cited increasing tension between industry and public health officials and/or governments over alcohol policy matters. In fact, many in these groups simply don’t view partnership as viable. As INSIGHTS noted in June, the American Medical Association, through its "Partner or Foe?" publication, in effect rejected the industry as a viable partner in preventing alcohol problems. Public health advocates view ICAP with suspicion primarily because 11 alcohol beverage companies fund the Center. Note too: A recent ICAP poll of government officials in 48 countries found that fully half reject the notion of the industry as a viable partner in prevention, primarily because they believe that the industry’s commercial interests are simply "at odds" with public health goals. At the ICAP meeting, a representative from WHO commented that dialog between industry and public health groups might be "helpful," but she also insisted "different groups have different roles," as well as "separate and distinct strategies." Finally, the industry itself is rarely united in prevention or other efforts. There are often sharp splits between beverages, between tiers, and even amongst supplier, wholesaler and retailer groups. Recent comments by top executives at AB and Miller critical of distiller efforts to advance equivalence in the US don’t bode well for brewer-distiller efforts here anytime soon.
Do these conflicts make partnership impossible? Not necessarily, according to many of the speakers at the ICAP conference. Several suggested that consensus of all interested parties is not the ultimate goal of partnership, nor is partnership itself. Identifying areas of co-operation to reduce alcohol problems and maximize the benefits of moderate drinking are the goals, according to ICAP’s president Marcus Grant. Management consultant John Luik probed the potential of partnerships between industry and the public health community, and disputed the notion that the differences between the two groups are necessarily "irreconcilable." For example, contrary to the public health charge that the industry is driven solely by commercial interests and will therefore resist any attempts to reduce any sales, Luik noted that the alcohol beverage industry has a strong financial interest in harm reduction, as does any industry that sells a potentially risky product, in order to protect shareholder value and long-term viability. Industry is surely driven by profit, Luik acknowledged, but plenty of industries have continued to profit in the face of consumption declines. (For example, the distilled spirits industry in the US.)
In addition, Luik insisted, there’s a "rich practical and theoretical store of experience about partnerships between seemingly irreconcilable groups." He cited the Metal Environmental Initiative, a partnership of mining companies and environmentalists that accommodates both profitability and environmental protection goals. Luik posited 3 principles around which partnerships may be forged in the alcohol policy arena: 1) recognition by both sides of the benefits of moderate drinking; 2) acceptance that "good public policy" attempts to reduce problematic drinking and enhance moderate drinking; 3) commitment to use the "best science available to determine the root causes of problem drinking and agree to go after them without any predetermined agenda." Given the tensions, past history and ambivalence that surround alcohol beverages, corralling all industry, government and public health "stakeholders" is likely to remain difficult, to say the least. Yet ICAP continues to provide a forum to explore the possibilities of partnership and to identify processes to achieve it. The critical next step, identified by Coors chairman Peter Coors: "move from dialog to actions."
While public health advocates continue to press for Congressional hearings into alcohol beverage advertising in the US, alcohol advertising remains a key global concern as well. That was clear at the recent meeting of the International Center for Alcohol Policies (ICAP) titled "Alcohol, Ethics & Society." (ICAP is a non-profit group funded by 11 international alcohol beverage companies that aims to build alcohol policy partnerships between industry, government, non-government organizations and public health officials.) At the meeting, a representative of the World Health Organization (WHO) and a public health researcher/ policy analyst from Australia leveled familiar criticisms of industry advertising and other marketing efforts, primarily that ads 1) are targeted at youth, 2) promote excessive consumption and/or 3) demean women. The WHO representative, scientist Leanne Riley, promised that WHO will "increase attention and focus" on alcohol advertising, and will assist countries in "adopting regulatory and legislative measures that ensure that young people are not exposed to the promotional messages on alcohol." Note: WHO considers individuals up to age 25 to be "youth." Australian researcher/analyst Ann Roche expanded the scope of marketing concerns (from the public health perspective) to include portrayals in film/television, producers

