“Kids’ homes and schools are the top exposure zones for junk food marketing in Aotearoa. That’s not passive exposure, it’s precision targeting,” says Vinetta Plummer.

Isn’t it time we forced junk food advertisers to back off targeting our tamariki and rangatahi, asks Vinetta Plummer.

Imagine tamariki at a kura kaupapa Māori, where kaiako have laid the foundations — wai is the best drinking option. But once the children are outside the school gates, the messages they encounter are very different.

On the short hīkoi home, tamariki pass bus stops and dairies plastered with ads peddling cheap deals for sugary drinks and food. The school might be water-only. But the streets tell another story.

A recent study on oral health of children in Aotearoa shows the impact of children’s exposure to junk. It found that 3 in 5 Māori and 7 in 10 Pasifika five-year-olds have experienced tooth decay, compared with just 1 in 3 for Pākehā children. These products weren’t part of our whakapapa — they were brought in, marketed and normalised. Toothache is now so common in some rohe that whānau call it “growing pains”. The ache is only the start. Missed school days, diabetes, and heart disease can follow.

Poor oral health is deeply connected to systemic inequities. Tamariki Māori are more likely to experience untreated teeth decay, delayed and long-term health complications due to barriers in access, affordability, and culturally safe services.

A systematic review shows that kids’ homes and schools are the top exposure zones for junk food marketing in Aotearoa.

That’s not passive exposure, it’s precision targeting. Marketers manufacture the illusion of “choice” by flooding children with ads that make them feel like these products are everyday essentials. What looks like freedom of choice is intentionally curated.

The Advertising Standards Authority’s new codes for food and beverage advertising targeting children, effective August 2024, still rely on industry self-policing. There are no fines. No enforcement. Adherence relies on promises to behave. The Ministry of Health has called this out, warning that junk food ads contribute to obesity, diabetes, and oral health issues. It also flagged the unethical practice of mining children’s personal data for targeted ads.

This isn’t only about health, it’s also about Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Article 2 of Te Tiriti guarantees the protection of taonga, like hauora. When junk food ads undermine kura-based health messages, they breach that promise. Ka Ora Ka Ako (the Healthy School Lunch Programme) was designed to uphold the right of tamariki to nourishing, protective environments — not ones where junk food marketing drowns out kaupapa Māori health messages. Rangatiratanga means our own people, not corporate brands, get to decide what “normal” looks like.

So, what does real protection look like? It could be a statutory restriction on junk food ads in places where 25 percent or more of the audience is under 16. Such measures should be collaboratively designed with mana whenua and the communities that they affect. Or it could be ring-fenced revenue for kaupapa Māori oral-health services. Policy supported by whakapapa-driven change.

The Public Health Association of New Zealand (PHANZ) and other public health voices are warning us that voluntary codes aren’t working and statutory regulation is needed. Junk food marketing continues to target tamariki and rangatahi in lower-income communities, with ads clustered around schools and public transport.

But it’s not just the adverts. Research shows that unhealthy food outlets are disproportionately concentrated in neighbourhoods experiencing entrenched hardship, making healthy choices harder to make and deepening health inequities.

In many low-income communities, the local food environment is saturated with fast food and convenience stores, while access to fresh, affordable kai is more limited. This imbalance contributes to long-term health inequities. Regulating advertising is one step. Addressing the density and placement of unhealthy outlets is just as critical.

The Health Coalition Aotearoa’s 2024 consensus statement warns that the government must legislate, rather than rely on industry, to protect children from the environmental pollution of unhealthy food marketing across schools, public transport, and digital platforms. But the current system protects profits, not our babies.

Statutory regulation of junk food advertising is the first step.

Dentists are also backing bans on sugary drinks in intermediate and secondary schools, warning that the current rates of tooth decay among these groups are unacceptable and preventable. They argue that restricting access in schools is a critical step toward protecting oral health and reducing long-term harm.

So, here’s the wero: Let the evidence speak louder than the billboards.

We all have a role to play here.

Kōrero with your school, local businesses, local board, councils and MPs about water-only policies and ad-free school zones.

Question why so many junk food ads and outlets are allowed to be in the faces of young people.

This is about mana motuhake. Not just for today’s tamariki but for future mokopuna. And it’s about popping the hood on a system that’s been running largely unchecked for too long.

We need policies that reduce the concentration of unhealthy food outlets in communities already experiencing hardship, and that support access to nourishing, affordable kai in the places tamariki and rangatahi live, learn and play.

Vinetta Plummer (Te Rarawa, Ngātiwai) is a government systems and policy advisor at Healthy Families Waitākere. Her role is to help drive change across the Waitākere region through identifying systems levers, building strategic relationships, and connecting the dots.

E-Tangata, 2025