MediaPost reported the 4As, ANA, and AAF sent a letter to lawmakers expressing concerns over a proposed bill that would ban advertising junk food to kids under 13, citing First Amendment rights as part of the opposing argument.
When industry revenue is at risk, the trade organizations prop up First Amendment rights.
Yet when DEIBA+ and Civil Rights come up, there is only political, patronizing, performative propaganda. Or crickets.
Ad Groups Raise Concerns Over Bill Banning Junk Food Ads To Children
By Wendy Davis
A bill that would ban junk food advertising to children under 13 raises “significant” First Amendment concerns, ad industry groups said in a letter sent to lawmakers Tuesday.
The Childhood Diabetes Reduction Act of 2026, introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), includes provisions that would prohibit companies from marketing or advertising junk food “in a manner that reasonably appears to be directed at children.”
The measure “would regulate truthful, non-misleading advertising concerning products that may lawfully be sold in commerce,” the Association of National Advertisers, American Association of Advertising Agencies and American Advertising Federation say in a letter sent to Sanders and Senator Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana).
The groups add that the bill “may have the practical effect of discouraging lawful advertising for ordinary food and beverage products, including, for example, restaurant advertising and advertising for products lawfully sold in commerce, even where the intended audience is not primarily children.”
The bill provides that ads will be considered child-directed if they use “themes or promotional strategies that appeal to children” — such as “fun or fantasy” themes, cartoon characters, social media influencers, free toys, interactive games or apps.
The ad groups write that those factors “are inherently subjective, making it difficult for regulated entities to determine in advance what advertising conduct is prohibited.”
The organizations add that many of those factors “are commonly used in mainstream advertising regardless of the intended audience.”
The bill also provides that ads are child-directed if placed in media where children make up at least 30% of the audience.
The ad groups say that threshold is low enough to “encompass a substantial portion of mainstream media.”
“While well-intentioned, this bill misses the mark by imposing broad restrictions on protected commercial speech that may extend well beyond advertising directed at children, while relying on vague standards that create substantial uncertainty regarding the scope of the prohibition,” the organizations write.
The bill would also require warning labels on junk food.
Some advocacy groups, including the nonprofit National Center for Health Research, support the bill. That organization said this week that the measure “would greatly improve children’s health by banning ads for junk food that are aimed at children.”
