New UK restrictions on the marketing of unhealthy food came into force on Monday 5 January, banning junk food advertising on television before 9pm and across online platforms, in a move aimed at reducing children’s exposure to high fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) products.
The long-trailed measures form part of the government’s childhood obesity strategy and are expected to reshape how brands, manufacturers and retailers promote products, particularly in digital channels.
However, the rules have prompted sharply contrasting reactions from consumer advocates and public health campaigners.
The Consumer Choice Center (CCC) has criticised the ban, arguing that it represents unnecessary government overreach and could harm smaller businesses.
Mike Salem, UK country associate for the CCC, said the policy amounted to “nanny-state paternalism”, adding that it restricts lawful advertising rather than tackling the underlying causes of obesity.
“Rather than empowering consumers with information and expanding access to healthier options, the government is choosing to restrict how companies communicate with the public, a move that undermines both free expression and competitive markets,” Salem added.
The group warned that advertising curbs do not address complex lifestyle and socio-economic factors linked to poor health, and said the measures risk setting a precedent for tighter regulation of other legal products. It also claimed that small and medium-sized businesses, including independent retailers and local brands, could be disproportionately affected as they rely more heavily on digital advertising to reach customers.
“This ban will hurt a good number of the 5.5 million small businesses who rely heavily on digital advertising to reach customers. Blanket online ad bans disproportionately harm smaller firms while entrenching larger incumbents,” Salem said, urging the government to focus instead on education, affordability and consumer empowerment.
By contrast, health campaigners have welcomed the restrictions but cautioned that loopholes could undermine their impact.
Anna Taylor, executive director of the Food Foundation, described the measures as a “world-leading milestone” in protecting children from harmful food marketing, but said businesses were already adapting their strategies.
According to the charity, spending on outdoor advertising rose by 28 per cent between 2021 and 2024, while the legislation allows companies to shift from product-based advertising to broader brand advertising. Taylor warned this could significantly weaken the policy unless further action is taken.
“We can’t stop here,” she said. “We must remain focused on the goal – banning all forms of junk food advertising to children, and we must create a policy process which can be more responsive to industry tactics and less vulnerable to industry lobbying.”