the impact of branding on children eating behaviour: coke vs mcd case study

ASSESSMENT COVER SHEET

Student’s name(Surname)

FONG(Given names)LI YIN

ID number 25036157 Phone 0451776968Unit name Brand Management Unit code MKF2521t

Note: If this is a group assignment, please include the names of all other group members.

Title of assignment Assignment 1 – Group assignment

Lecturer/tutor Colin Jevons/Azra

Is this an authorised group assignment? Yes No

Has any part of this assignment been previously submitted as part of another unit/course? Yes No

Tutorial/laboratory day & time Thursday 9am

Due date: 05/09/2014Date submitted: 05/09/14

Word count: 2492

All work must be submitted by the due date. If an extension of work is granted this must be specified with the signature of the lecturer/tutor.

Extension granted until (date) ................................ Signature of lecturer/tutor .................................................

Please note that it is your responsibility to retain copies of your assessments.

Intentional plagiarism amounts to cheating in terms of Monash University Statute 4.1 – Discipline.

Plagiarism: Plagiarism means to take and use another person’s ideas and or manner of expressing them and to pass these off as one’s own by failing to give appropriate acknowledgement. This includes material from any source, staff, students or the Internet – published and unpublished works.

Collusion: Collusion is unauthorised collaboration with another person or persons.

Where there are reasonable grounds for believing that intentional plagiarism or collusion has occurred, this will be reported to the Chief Examiner, who may disallow the work concerned by prohibiting assessment or refer the matter to the faculty manager.

Student Statement: I have read the university’s Plagiarism Policy and Procedures

[http://www.policy.monash.edu/policy-bank/academic/education/conduct/plagiarism-policy.html.]. I understand the consequences of engaging in plagiarism and collusion as described in University Statute 4.1. Part III –

Academic Misconduct [http://www.monash.edu.au/pubs/calendar/Statutes/Statute04.html#Heading110]. I have taken proper care of safeguarding this work and made all reasonable effort to ensure it could not be copied. I acknowledge that the assessor of this assignment may for the purposes of assessment, reproduce the assignment and:

i. provide to another member of faculty; and/orii. submit it to a plagiarism checking service; and/or

iii. submit it to a plagiarism checking service which may then retain a copy of the assignment on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking.*

I certify that I have not plagiarised the work of others or participated in unauthorised collaboration when preparing this assignment.

Signature ..................................................... Date……………………………………* delete (iii) if not applicablePrivacy StatementThe information on this form is collected for the primary purpose of assessing your assignment. Other purposes of collection include recording your plagiarism and collusion declaration, attending to course and administrative matters and statistical analyses. If you choose not to complete all the questions on this form it may not be possible for Monash University to assess your assignment. You have a right to access personal information that Monash University holds about you, subject to any exceptions in relevant legislation. If you wish to seek access to your personal information or inquire about the handling of your personal information, please contact the University Privacy Officer: [email protected]

X

X



LIM(Given names)WOOI TEIK









Word count: 2492











iv. provide to another member of faculty; and/orv. submit it to a plagiarism checking service; and/or

vi. submit it to a plagiarism checking service which may then retain a copy of the assignment on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking.*


Signature ..................................................... Date……………………………………* delete (iii) if not applicablePrivacy StatementThe information on this form is collected for the primary purpose of assessing your assignment. Other purposes of collection include recording your plagiarism and collusion declaration, attending to course and administrative matters and statistical analyses. If you choose not to complete all the questions on this form it may not be possible for Monash University to assess your assignment. You have a right to access personal information that Monash University holds about you, subject to any exceptions in relevant legislation. If you wish to seek access to your personal information or inquire about the handling of your personal information, please contact the University Privacy

X

X

Officer: [email protected]



WONG(Given names)EDDIE ZHEN FEI









Word count: 2492











vii. provide to another member of faculty; and/orviii. submit it to a plagiarism checking service; and/or

ix. submit it to a plagiarism checking service which may then retain a copy of the assignment on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking.*


Signature ..................................................... Date……………………………………* delete (iii) if not applicablePrivacy StatementThe information on this form is collected for the primary purpose of assessing your assignment. Other purposes of collection include recording your plagiarism and collusion declaration, attending to course and administrative matters and statistical analyses. If you choose

X

X

not to complete all the questions on this form it may not be possible for Monash University to assess your assignment. You have a right to access personal information that Monash University holds about you, subject to any exceptions in relevant legislation. If you wish to seek access to your personal information or inquire about the handling of your personal information, please contact the University Privacy Officer: [email protected]



WONG(Given names)EUNICE KAH MUN









Word count: 2492











x. provide to another member of faculty; and/orxi. submit it to a plagiarism checking service; and/or

xii. submit it to a plagiarism checking service which may then retain a copy of the assignment on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking.*


Signature ..................................................... Date……………………………………* delete (iii) if not applicablePrivacy StatementThe information on this form is collected for the primary purpose of assessing your assignment. Other purposes of collection include

X

X

recording your plagiarism and collusion declaration, attending to course and administrative matters and statistical analyses. If you choose not to complete all the questions on this form it may not be possible for Monash University to assess your assignment. You have a right to access personal information that Monash University holds about you, subject to any exceptions in relevant legislation. If you wish to seek access to your personal information or inquire about the handling of your personal information, please contact the University Privacy Officer: [email protected]

The Impact of Branding on Eating Behaviour of A Study of McDonald’s and Coca-Cola

MKF2521 Brand Management

Executive Summary

This report aims to evaluate branding impacts on the eating behavior of children. It

draws attention to the fact that gullible children are heavily exposed to marketing messages

which attempt to sway their dietary habits. Children’s attention are grasped by an increasing

number of touchpoints, both physical and digital. McDonald’s and Coca Cola, which are

reputed as top market leaders in the industry, will serve as illustrations throughout this study

to demonstrate the negative effects of branding.

Mcdonald’s uses attribute related cues such as Happy Meals, Playlands and its trade

character Ronald Mcdonald. Happy Meals which come with brightly coloured packaging and

unique toy premiums are used to attract young consumers. In addition to providing

experiential and symbolic values with Playlands, McDonald’s develop brand personification

through its iconic ambassador Ronald McDonald. This induces children to associate fun and

happiness with McDonald’s and consequently encourage consumption of unhealthy food.

Besides, Coca-Cola entices children through sports sponsorship, trade character and

digital marketing. The Olympic Games acts as a global platform for Coca-Cola to increase

brand recognition and lure children to drink high sugar content drink. Besides digital

marketing, they commercialized the character of Santa Claus as a touch point where children

transfer joyful associations of the character into liking for the brand. This results in high

brand preference as children are unknowingly deceived into consuming the unhealthy drink.

As children are unable to digest the persuasive intent of branding, they are easily

susceptible to its influence. Marketing of energy dense foods and fast food restaurants

contributes to an alarming rate of obesity among children. This leads to the occurrence of

chronic diseases such as diabetes which remains the most rapid-growing condition in

Australian children. This exhibits how the food environment is increasingly obesogenic in the

presence of major food companies like McDonald’s and Coca-Cola.

In light of these issues, recommendations have been put forward to minimize the

adverse influence that branding has on eating behavior of children. It is suggested that

governmental authorities should heighten regulation of marketing activities and increase the

inclusivity in definitions of these regulations. Furthermore it is proposed that companies

should address ethical considerations when they foster brand preferences in children.

McDonalds and Coca-Cola can include healthier alternatives which meet certain nutritional

standards.

The Impact of Branding on Eating Behaviour of A Study of McDonald’s and Coca-Cola

MKF2521 Brand Management

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction 1

2.0 Discussion 2

2.1 McDonald’s 2-3

2.2 Coca-Cola 4-6

2.3 Implications 7

3.0 Conclusion 8

4.0 Recommendations 9

Reference List 10-13

Appendices 14-16

1.0 Introduction

Branding serves as a basic perceptual cue that recognises and recalls a product as one

is able to associate it with particular perceptual characteristics (Achenreiner & John, 2003).

Children, being cognitively and psychologically defenseless, become the affluent target that

has made this market worthy of pursuit by businesses. As young as three, they can recognise

and form mental images of brand logos and mascots. It makes effective cradle-to-grave

strategies eminently valuable as business tend to gain a customer lifetime value of

US$100,000 (Lindstrom, 2004).

In 1983, businesses spent $100 million in marketing expense to children. Today, they

are spending almost $17 billion annually (CBS news, 2007). Children exposure to the

marketing activities has come to a point where branding has been labelled as a “bad

thing”. Food branding is prevalent in the context of this report. The food industries grasp

children’s attention through an increasing number of brand touch points, including television,

billboards, internet, and through education system. It is estimated that children view more

than 40,000 advertisements for food each year and 98% are advertising food high in sugar, fat

and sodium. They are bombarded with information for food and beverages, telling them what,

where and how to eat (Keller, Kuilema & Lee, 2012). It affects the eating behaviour of

children to the extent where it raises concerns on obesity and diabetes. McDonald's and Coca-

Cola, being the top players in their respective markets (IBIS World, 2014), are brought into

discussion on marketing to children. The strategic alliance between both companies enhances

their brands and presence in both markets. That is the reason they have such an adverse

influence on children in terms of their eating behaviour and food consumption.

Secondary data on the issue and organisation involved is collected from credible

internet sources. Pertinent academic journals were also consulted to identify and analyse the

impact of branding on the eating behaviour of children. It is assumed that the information

collected through relevant websites and news articles is true and it reflects the current state of

the issue and organisations. Both McDonald’s and Coca-Cola will be used as examples to

demonstrate how children are affected by powerful brands. Its branding strategies will be

evaluated to deepen the understandings regarding the issue. Finally, recommendations will be

made about what the organisations could do to mitigate the effects of its branding strategies

on the eating behaviour of children.

1

2.1 McDonald’s

McDonald’s has an almost inescapable presence in children’s lives as it represents the

fast food of choice for many of them. It is one of the most identifiable brands, with 93% of

children recognising it by its golden arches (McAlister & Cornwell, 2010). For over a decade,

McDonald’s remains the most advertised brand to children under the age of 12 (see Appendix

A). The company spent approximately $1 billion contributing over one quarter of the total

advertisements viewed by children (Harris et al., 2013). Awareness created from repeated

exposure to the brand may translate into frequent requests for unhealthy food from

McDonald’s. Therefore external food cues from these advertisements can lead to the

possibility of overeating.

McDonald’s entices children with its Happy Meals, which ranked amongst the worst

food choices with as many as 880 calories per meal (Harris et al.,2013). These meals are

packaged in bright smiling boxes that serve as a fun visual stimulus to captivate children.

Robinson, Borzekowski, Matheson and Kraemer (2007) found that children favoured food in

McDonald’s packaging over plain packaging. This indicates that non-product related

attributes like packaging can alter taste perceptions. As children are heavily influenced by it,

the packaging of Happy Meals serves as McDonald’s branding tool which manipulates

children to consume unhealthy meal offerings.

Furthermore, Happy Meals come with toy premiums based on major children’s

motion pictures. These include Ice Age, Despicable Me and The Smurfs. According to past

studies, associations with these well-known characters develop a favourable consumer

relationship with children (Lawrence, 2003). The use of licensed cartoon characters increases

food intake (Keller et al., 2012). It establishes a strong identity symbol which is instantly

recognisable. This creates a sense of familiarity which results in heightened brand preference.

Hence, with the promise of a toy, children are consequently beguiled into choosing meals

with inappropriate nutritional value.

2

McDonald’s also lure children into their restaurants with colourful play areas called

Playlands. They associate Playlands with symbolic benefits such as adoration and acceptance

(McAlister & Cornwell, 2010). These attributes may induce them to visit McDonald’s

frequently as they aspire to embody the imagery of being popular. Moreover, children’s

overall McDonald’s experience is enhanced through an entertaining time at Playlands.

Experiential value gained from brand interactions can form positive consumer attitudes and

increase brand equity (Fiore, 2010). Hence this encourages children to eat poorly as they

repeatedly associate unhealthy food from McDonald’s with good times.

As part of the McDonald’s experience, McDonald’s strategically tapped into

children’s minds through their infamous trade character, Ronald McDonald. Trade character

is the personification of the brand name that favourably accents the brand message and

facilitates the brand identity formation (Mizerski, 1995). Using Ronald as the brand

ambassador, McDonald’s stimulates positive feelings among children and get them to

associate fun and happy times with McDonald’s (Corporate Accountability International

(CAI), 2013). This is evident when McDonald’s started reaching out children at schools and

libraries, giving workshops on physical fitness and reading in addition to distributing

McDonald’s vouchers. Although McDonald’s seemed to be contributing to the community,

unknowingly, the presence of Ronald McDonald promotes a brand of foods that have

devastating effect on children’s health (CAI, 2010).

It reached a boiling point where children with excellent grades and attendance records

were rewarded with Happy Meals (NY Times, 2008). By leveraging their presence in the

education system, the imprint of Ronald McDonald and the Golden Arches (see Appendix B)

on the school reports jacket received numerous protests from parents children were exposed

to a brand that deceive them with thoughts of fun and happiness. Due to the susceptibility

towards the adverse effects of branding (Keillor, 2007), children are unable to interpret brand

intention and tend to perceive unhealthy food as fun and exciting. These associations

ultimately take its toll on children as it will be deeply ingrained in children’s eating

behaviour.

3

2.2 Coca-Cola

Coca-Cola is the world largest beverage company, having their business portfolio

over 200 countries across the globe (Coca-Cola, 2014). Despite appearance in major

countries, Coca-Cola anticipates to increase brand-building initiatives by up to $1 billion by

Year 2016 (Zmuda, 2014). Coca-Cola also has contract with fast food giant, McDonald’s

since 1950s (The Economist, 1998). This strategic alliance worsens the impact of branding

towards the children eating behaviour as every McDonald’s incorporates Coca-Cola as their

beverage element.

In 2013, Coca-Cola spent more than US$290 million in sponsorship, primarily in

sports (IEG, 2014). Sport sponsorship refers to the assistances sponsors provide to sports

events in exchange for logo and banner display, forming a mutually beneficial relationship.

(Simoes & Agante, 2014). Companies are committed to transfer the positive feelings of

sports involvement to their respective brands (Mannberg & Muotka, 2004). This increased

brand favourability strongly impacts children’s eating behavior (Simoes & Agante, 2014).

Coca-Cola capitalise by sponsoring every Olympic Games since 1928 (Phillips, 2012). Since

more than 1.4 million children viewed NBC’s prime-time coverage of the 2008 Olympics

Games (Nielsen, 2008), the repetitive appearance of Coca-Cola’s logo increased brand

awareness and recognition, therefore elevating the intake of sugary drink in children

compared to healthier options like water and juices.

Coca-Cola takes a further step in the extension of brand associations by introducing

its limited edition ‘Olympic Game Glass’ (see Appendix C), collectable in more than 10

markets, including Australia (The Freeman, 2008). Its availability is restricted where the

glasses are only sold in McDonald’s. Children, being enthusiasts of Olympic Games, were in

vain to own the Coca-Cola glasses to have a sense of belongingness in the community as the

Olympic Games unites 204 nations. Hence, the combined effect of Olympic-to-Coke and

Coke-McDonald’s brand associations damages the pure objective of the Olympic Games.

Instead of fostering sportsmanship and healthy lifestyle, children now relate the event to

unhealthy diet of both Coca-Cola drink and McDonald’s which strengthens the previous

discussion on McDonald’s.

4

Secondly, like McDonalds, Coca-Cola utilises Santa Claus as their trade character. In

the 1930s, the modernisation of Santa Claus was a commercial creation of Coca-Cola as they

intended to associate the character dressed in red-and-white (see Appendix D) with the

corporate colour of Coca-Cola (Cramp, 1993). It was the ultimate persuasive element in

Coca-Cola brand strategy to market their product to children as there is higher preference for

a brand character when positive emotional experience association emerges in a child’s

memory (Hemar-Nicholas & Gollety, 2012). Having brand characters like Santa Claus that

appeal emotionally to children increases favourability of sugary drink like Coca-Cola rather

than a healthier substitute like juices (de Droog, Valkenburg & Buijzen, 2011).

The goal of the campaign was to create "fun, pleasure and enjoyment" in consumers

for Coca-Cola in the same way people feel for Santa (Cramp, 1993). Hemar-Nicholas &

Gollety (2012) finds that children's positive experiences with the character - in this case

Santa, contribute to their ability to learn about the brand and the brand image. So, the same

joy of Christmas becomes a joy children feel for Coca-Cola. The transferability of emotions

from an icon to the brand leads to children perceiving Coca-Cola as a fun and festive drink

rather than a fizzy sugar-laden beverage. Besides that, products consumed by children during

young age provide familiarity which translates into future brand preference and consumption

(Moore, Wilkie & Lutz, 2012). With the high sugar input, children’s current health will not

only be at stake, but they will be prone to the brand later in life which poses a health hazard

that raises concerns for parents.

Coca-Cola also steps into children’s technological footprint as industries are

increasingly using entertaining innovative technology to reach and engage consumers

(Chordas, 2007). Coca-Cola's rewards programme website, MyCokeRewards.com, does not

seem child-targeted but has rewards that hold strong children appeal with Disney Cruise

vacations and theme park passes. The site draws 42,000 unique child visitors every month in

2012 (Harris et al., 2011). It is a strong marketing technique considering that online

experiences contributes to consumers view of brand's credibility and also perceived brand

value (Trueman, Cornelius & Wallace, 2012). Children who are excited about the rewards

program will see Coca-Cola as a favourable brand.

5

Two of the Coca-Cola's most popular iPhone applications are "Magic Coke Bottle"

and "Spin the Coke" has strong youth appeal. On Facebook, Coca-cola is the eleventh most

popular page with 31 million fans (TheNextWeb.com, 2011). Although Facebook terms of

service does not allow children under 13 to be members, Consumer Reports (2011) shows

that 5 million Facebook users were younger than 13 years. Research has shown that just mere

exposure to brand names does build brand preference (Olson & Thjomoe, 2003). Through

these technological interactions, children are "taught" about the brand and the product and

can lead to children consciously and actively choosing to drink Coca-Cola instead of water.

Hence, children are unknowingly consuming high levels of sugar and caffeine which is

harmful for their health.

6

2.3 Implications

Consequently, children are the ultimate victim in branding. The usage of salient

features like bright colour, pictures and fun characters drowns the children in the insidious

marketing of companies (Keller et al., 2012). The incapability of children to digest the

persuasive intention of marketing increases the vulnerability of children towards

inappropriate food choices and beverages options. According to World Health Organization

(WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, it is concluded that

marketing of energy-dense foods and fast food restaurants leads to the alarming rate of

obesity among the world’s children (WHO, 2014). In Australia alone, 1 in 4 children are

overweight or obese (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2013). This phenomenon is

proven to have concomitant with increase occurrence of chronic diseases in children like

diabetes which remains the most rapid-growing chronic condition in Australia (Diabetes

Australia, 2013). It enhances the understanding on how the food environment is increasingly

obesogenic and has been labelled “toxic” in the presence of major food companies like

McDonald’s and Coca-Cola (Keller et al., 2012).

In the lights of these issues, McDonald’s was urged to retire its character, Ronald

McDonald just as Coca-Cola was asked to stop weight-washing obesity with heavy

advertising (Daily Mail, 2011). The initiatives were intents by public health groups and the

government in attempt to moderate brand associations in children with unhealthy food and

sugary drinks offered by McDonalds and Coca-Cola.

7

3.0 Conclusion

In conclusion, it is clear that branding does have an impact on the eating behaviour of

children. The discussion revolves around two industry giants, McDonald’s and Coca-Cola

and how their marketing strategies have an adverse influence on the children’s perception

towards the brands.

The ingenious nature of McDonald’s that somehow found its way to market to

children builds awareness and instill brand recognition in children’s naïve minds. Happy

Meals, which include toy premiums, entice children to translate their brand recognition into

product requests which are the main concerns of parents today. The symbolic playground at

every McDonald’s forms the complete ‘McDonald’s experience’ which associates the brand

with fun and happy times.

Coca-Cola was doing the same thing targeting at children. Like how McDonald’s use

Ronald McDonald as a symbol, Coca-Cola transformed Santa Claus as their brand image

which resonates with children. Coca-Cola also took the challenge to market to children at a

global scale – through Olympic Games. Their pledge of refraining child-related marketing

did not stop them to sponsor the Olympics that reaches out to millions of children who watch

television.

Above all, the aftermath of such marketing strategies are the main reasons health

problem like obesity and chronic condition like diabetes are evident in children since young.

It is resulted from the children’s inability to process information cognitively which eventually

impact on the eating behaviour of children today.

8

4.0 Recommendations

The health danger to children is worrying as it will affect the generation's capabilities

to live a healthier and happy lifestyle. It recommended to have increased regulations by

governmental authorities on food and beverages industry's practices. The concept of

marketing to children 12 years old and below needs a more inclusive definition, to include

non-children specific marketing that are also commonly viewed by children. Unlike products

from McDonald’s and Coca-Cola, meals and drinks sold to children should meet a certain

nutritional standard.

Besides that, ethics should be of consideration when companies foster brand

preference in children. As some marketing efforts are indirectly influencing children, modern

consumers are becoming increasingly aware of what brands do and will react accordingly.

McDonalds and Coca-Cola could include healthier alternative options of food and drinks to

children. Consequently, a brand that is seen to be ethical will attract a positive consumer's

perception of the brand which helps to build brand image and increases the superior value

delivered to them.

9

Reference

Achenreiner, B., G., & John, D., R. (2003). The Meaning of Brand Names to Children: A

Developmental Investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 205-219

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2013). Overweight and obesity. Retrieved from

http://www.aihw.gov.au/overweight-and-obesity/

CBS News. (2007, May 17). Resources: Marketing To Kids. Retrieved September 1, 2014,

from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/resources-marketing-to-kids/

Chordas, Lori. (2007). High evolved: more insurers are using technology to amplify their

brands and to entertain. Best's Review, 108(5), 28-32.

Coca-Cola. (2010). Responsible Marketing. Retrieved Sept 4, 2014, from http://www.coca-

cola.co.uk/about-us/responsible-marketing.html

Cola-Cola. (2014, June). Coca-cola at a Glance. Retrieved September 1, 2014, from

http://www.coca-colacompany.com/our-company/infographic-coca-cola-at-a-glance

Corporate Accountability International. (2010, May 1). Clowning with kid’s health: The case

for Ronald McDonald’s retirement. Retrieved September 4, 2014, from

http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org

Corporate Accountability International. (2014, July 8). Nutrition Standard won’t fix big

food’s worst child marketing tactics. Retrieved September 4, 2014, from

http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org

Cramp, B. (1993, December 16). The great Santa Claus hi-jack mystery. Marketing, , 18.

Daily Mail. (2011, May 20). Is it the end for Ronald McDonald? Doctors urge fast food store

to stop 'dangerous and predatory' marketing aimed at children. Retrieved September 5,

2014, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/

de Droog, S. M., Valkenburg, P.M. & Buijzen, M. (2011). Using brand characters to promote

young children's liking of and purchase requests for fruits. Journal of Health

Communication, 16(1), 79-89.

Diabetes Australia. (2013). Diabetes in Australia. Retrieved from

http://www.diabetesaustralia.com.au/Understanding-Diabetes/Diabetes-in-Australia/

10

Fiore, A.M. (2010). Understanding aesthetics for the merchandising and design professional.

New York, NY: Fairchild Books.

Harris, J.L., Schwartz, M.B., Munsell, C.R., Dembek, C., Liu, S., LoDolce, M., …Kidd, B.

(2013). Fast food facts 2013: Measuring progress in nutrition and marketing to

children and teens. Retrieved from Yale Rudd Center website:

fastfoodmarketing.org/media/FastFoodFACTS_Report.pdf

Hemar-Nicholas, Y. & Gollety, M. (2012). Using brand characters when targeting children:

what for? An exploration of managers' and childrens' viewpoints. Young Consumers,

13(1), 20-29.

IBIS World. (2014, August). Soft Drink Manufacturing in Australia. Retrieved from

http://clients1.ibisworld.com.au/

IBIS World. (2014, June). Fast Food Services in Australia. Retrieved from

http://clients1.ibisworld.com.au/

IEG. (2014, May). Who Spent The Most On Sponsorship In 2013: IEG’s Top Spenders List.

Retrieved September 4, 2014 from http://www.sponsorship.com/iegsr/2014/05/27/

Who-Spent-The-Most-On-Sponsorship-In-2013--IEG-s-T.aspx

International Event Group (2012). Economic Uncertainty To Slow Sponsorship Growth In

2012. Retreived from September 4, 2014 from http://www.sponsorship.com/About-

IEG/Press Room/Economic-Uncertainty-To-Slow-Sponsorship-Growth-In.aspx

Keillor, B. D. (2007). Marketing in the 21st Century: Integrated marketing communication.

California, USA: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Keller, K.L., Kuilema, L.G., Lee, N., Yoon, J., Mascaro, B., Combes, A.L., ...Halford, J.C.G.

(2012). The impact of food branding on children’s eating behavior and obesity.

Physiology & Behaviour, 106, 379-389.

Lawrence, D. (2003). The role of characters in kids marketing. Young consumers, 4(3), 43-

48.

Lindstrom, M. (2004). Branding is no longer child's play. Journal of Consumer Marketing,

21(3), 175-182

11

Lutz.A, Nudelman.M (2013) See Which Major Restaurant Serve Coca-cola Vs. Pepsi.

Retrieved September 4, 2014 from http://www.businessinsider.com.au/restaurants-

that-serve-coke-vs-pepsi-2013-12

Mannberg, M., Muotka, D.. (2014) Sport Sponsorship: Case study of Audi. (Bachelor’s

Thesis, Luleå University Of Technology, Luleå, Sweden) Retrieved September 4,

2014 from http://epubl.ltu.se/1404-5508/2004/143/LTU-SHU-EX-04143-SE.pdf

McAlister, A.R. & Cornwell, T.B. (2010). Children’s brand symbolism understanding: Links

to theory of mind and executive functioning. Psychology and Marketing, 27(3), 203-

228.

Mizerski, R. (1995). The Relationship Between Cartoon Trade Character Recognition and

Attitude Toward Product Category in Young Children. Journal of Marketing, 59(1),

58-70.

Moore, E. S., Wilkie, W. L. & Lutz, R.J. (2002). Passing the torch; Intergenerational

influences as a source of brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 66(2), 17-37.

Nielsen (2008). Who were the real winners of the Beijing Olympics? Just ask Nielsen.

Retrieved September 4, 2014, from cn.en.nielsen.com/site/documents/Olympic_pdf

NY Times. (2008, January 18). McDonald’s Ending Promotion on Jackets of Children’s

Report Cards. Retrieved September 4, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/

Olson, E. L., Thjomoe, H. M. (2003). The effects of peripheral exposure to information on

brand preference. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1/2), 243-255.

Phillips, J. (2012, July 5). TIME: The Movement to Ban McDonald’s, Coca-Cola From the

London Olympics. Retrieved September 4, 2014 from

http://business.time.com/2012/07/05/olympics-2012-the-move-to-ban-mcdonalds-

coca-cola-from-the-london-games/

Robinson, T.N., Borzekowski. D.L.G., Matheson, D.M., & Kraemer, H.C. (2007). Effects of

fast food branding on young children’s taste preferences. Archives of Pediatrics &

Adolescent Medicine, 161(8), 792-797.

12

Simoes, I., & Agante, L. (2014). The Impact Of event sponsorship on Portuguese children’s

brand image and purchase intentions. International Journal Of Advertising, 33(3),

533-566

The Economist. (1998, April 2). The Science of alliance. Retrieved September 4, 2014 from

http://www.economist.com/node/361379

The Freeman (2008, August 11). Coca-Cola and McDonald’s: Celebrate the Olympics with

Limited Edition Olympic Games Glass. Retreived September 4, 2014 from

http://www.philstar.com/cebu-lifestyle/78603/coca-cola-and- mcdonald

%E2%80%99s-celebrate-olympics-limited-edition-olympic-games-glass

Trueman, M., Cornelius, N. & Wallace, J. (2012). Building brand value online: exploring

relationships between company and city brands. European Journal of Marketing,

46(7/8), 1013-1031.

Welch, M. (1991). Everything goes better with Santa Claus. Atlanta Business Chronicle,

14(25), 44A.

Williams, J.D., Pasch, K.E., & Collins, C.A. (2013). Advances in communication research to

reduce childhood obesity. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media

World Health Organisation. (2014). Facts and figures on childhood obesity. Retrieved from

http://www.who.int/end-childhood-obesity/facts/en/

Zmuda, N. (2014, February 18). Coca-cola Boosts Media Spending as Demand Slows.

Retrieved September 4, 2014 from http://adage.com/article/news/coca-cola-boosts-

marketing-spend-demand-slows/291747/

13

Appendices

Appendix A: Trends in exposure to TV advertising by restaurant and by age group

Harris, J.L., Schwartz, M.B., Munsell, C.R., Dembek, C., Liu, S., LoDolce, M., …Kidd, B. (2013). Fast food facts 2013: Measuring progress in nutrition and marketing to children and teens. Retrieved from Yale Rudd Center website: fastfoodmarketing.org/media/FastFoodFACTS_Report.pdf

14

Appendix B: Imprint of Ronald McDonald and the Golden Arches on the school reports jacket

Calorie Lab. (n.d). McDonald’s scraps coupons on report cards [Image]. Retrieved from http://calorielab.com/news/2008/01/18/nibbles-shaping-up-england-and-shoring-up-the-wii-balance-board/

15

Appendix C: Limited edition ‘Olympic Game Glass’

Coca Cola. (n.d). News releases [Image]. Retrieved from http://www.coca-cola.com.sg/news/localnews.asp?NeID=415

Appendix D: Coca-Cola commercially associates Santa Claus with its trademark red and white colour of the corporate logo

Coca Cola. (n.d). The True History of the Modern Day Santa Claus [Image]. Retrieved from http://www.coca-colacompany.com/holidays/the-true-history-of-the-modern-day-santa-claus

16

the impact of branding on children eating behaviour: coke vs mcd case study

Documents

intentional plagiarism

authorised group assignment

universitys plagiarism

extension of work

collusion declaration

group members

purposes of assessment

signature of lecturertutor