Day 065 - 09 Dec 94 - Page 02
1 9th December 1994.
3 MS. DIBB, Recalled.
4 Cross-Examined by Mr. Rampton.
6 Q. Ms. Dibb, when you were last here we ended with effectively
7 a discussion of what you called an old chestnut, I think,
8 that is to say, the phenomenon that Popeye's popularity in
9 America had no beneficial effect on the sale of spinach.
10 Can I ask you whether you have got there your discussion
11 papers what you called it, I think, Children: Advertisers'
12 Dream, Nutrition Nightmare?
13 A. I have.
15 Q. Could you also have to hand the second volume of the pale
16 green references which, please, open at tab 4 which is, as
17 you recall, an extract from June Esserman's book.
19 MR. JUSTICE BELL: The second volume?
21 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, yes, bundle 2, it is called, section C
22 within tab 4.
24 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
26 MR. RAMPTON: I remind you, Ms. Dibb, that we got as far as the
27 second page of that copied extract at the bottom of the
28 right-hand column was the reference to Popeye. I am going
29 to come on to the next page of this in moment, but first I
30 would like to ask you about a couple of passages in your
31 discussion paper. First of all, on page 4 in the left-hand
32 column and the third paragraph, you have written this:
34 "Advertising, particularly television advertising, is one
35 factor which influences children's food choices.
36 Advertising messages have a power and status that rivals
37 and may exceed parental guidance and educational
38 influences." Can I ask you what that assertion is based on
39 by way of research and experimental data?
40 A. Yes, I believe that there are -- is research that
41 supports this. Certainly I do not think there is really
42 very much debate about television advertising being one
43 factor which influences children's food choices. The
44 report acknowledges that there are a number of influences
45 that affect children's food choices, of which advertising
46 is one that may affect children's food choices, both
47 directly and indirectly.
49 Q. I was really more concerned with the second sentence.
50 I read the first for context because it seemed to me fair
51 to do so, but I was more concerned with the second sentence
52 - the assertion, if I may summarise it, that the power of
53 advertising so far as children's choices are concerned is
54 as powerful as or more powerful than that of parental
55 influence and educational influence as teachers.
56 I wondered what that was based on?
57 A. Yes. Specifically on educational influences, you will
58 have to excuse if you leave me a few moments to find the
59 reference? I think it refers to one reference that I do
60 quote in here which looked at education that children