It’s not government related at all, it’s an industry-created body, formed by members of the alcohol and beverage industry, to self-regulate their advertising material.
And yes, extremely cushy. Like the article said, it’s created a voluntary code with no fines or penalties on its members, and was only spurred to action by a viral story of outrage and complaints spreading on social media. Probably mostly consists of board members who attend a few days a year and one or two employees who just press yes/approve on whatever they’re sent.
“Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code had given pre-approval for Hard Solo as an appropriate product.” Only to backflip quickly under actual political and media scrutiny once it’s release became public knowledge.
Even it’s response to one complaint’s suggestion that hard solo sounds like Han solo - and therefore potentially evoked associations with stars wars in the minds of some kids - was petty.
"the packaging doesn’t appeal to minors by having “a similar name to [a] Star Wars character”. How do they know that? I myself saw Han Solo at first glance, and thought of the fairly recent Han Solo movie -with black and yellow stencil font- before re-reading it as Hard Solo.
Given they didn’t detect anything wrong with mimicking a soft drink before, I don’t think they have any legitimacy to arbitrarily dismiss other potential associations, especially when the colours pretty much match exactly the title schema of the Han Solo and Star Wars movies.
Anyway (I got distracted sorry), the article itself has people stating this is why industry self-regulation doesn’t work, and why an actual government body with a mandatory code and penalties should be in place.
But, its much cheaper for government not to, since then government would need to fund the new body and it’s employees, and spend time drawing up and debating relevant legislation and regulatory powers, whereas ABAC is funded by its member companies.
Eh, I reckon the argument that it’s enticing to children is a stretch, but I honestly don’t care that much. I did a quick read through of the website before my previous post and noticed it was industry-funded, but also noticed that they have a government representative in their body, hence, ‘quasi-governmental’. I don’t really know enough about it to know if it’s effective as a regulator despite the obvious bias.
It’s not government related at all, it’s an industry-created body, formed by members of the alcohol and beverage industry, to self-regulate their advertising material.
And yes, extremely cushy. Like the article said, it’s created a voluntary code with no fines or penalties on its members, and was only spurred to action by a viral story of outrage and complaints spreading on social media. Probably mostly consists of board members who attend a few days a year and one or two employees who just press yes/approve on whatever they’re sent.
“Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code had given pre-approval for Hard Solo as an appropriate product.” Only to backflip quickly under actual political and media scrutiny once it’s release became public knowledge.
Even it’s response to one complaint’s suggestion that hard solo sounds like Han solo - and therefore potentially evoked associations with stars wars in the minds of some kids - was petty.
"the packaging doesn’t appeal to minors by having “a similar name to [a] Star Wars character”. How do they know that? I myself saw Han Solo at first glance, and thought of the fairly recent Han Solo movie -with black and yellow stencil font- before re-reading it as Hard Solo.
Given they didn’t detect anything wrong with mimicking a soft drink before, I don’t think they have any legitimacy to arbitrarily dismiss other potential associations, especially when the colours pretty much match exactly the title schema of the Han Solo and Star Wars movies.
Anyway (I got distracted sorry), the article itself has people stating this is why industry self-regulation doesn’t work, and why an actual government body with a mandatory code and penalties should be in place.
But, its much cheaper for government not to, since then government would need to fund the new body and it’s employees, and spend time drawing up and debating relevant legislation and regulatory powers, whereas ABAC is funded by its member companies.
Eh, I reckon the argument that it’s enticing to children is a stretch, but I honestly don’t care that much. I did a quick read through of the website before my previous post and noticed it was industry-funded, but also noticed that they have a government representative in their body, hence, ‘quasi-governmental’. I don’t really know enough about it to know if it’s effective as a regulator despite the obvious bias.