• Damian Maganja, Madeleine de Carle, Tazman Davies, Clara Gómez Donoso, Tailane Scapin, Adrian J Cameron, Jimmy C Y Louie, Mark D Huffman, Kathy Trieu, and WuJason H YJHYThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, Australia..
• The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. dmaganja@georgeinstitute.org.au.
• Bmc Med. 2024 Aug 26; 22 (1): 341341.

BackgroundProminent product placement is a core promotional tactic in retail food environments. How this practice has been adapted for online supermarkets, and the extent to which it is applied to healthier and less healthy food products in this setting, is largely unknown. We aimed to investigate placement-type promotions of food products in Australian online supermarkets.MethodsWe developed a new method to assess placement promotions and applied it to the online stores of the two largest supermarket retailers in Australia. Each online store was audited across six 'locations' (input prior to data collection), including a randomly selected high socio-economic position area and low socio-economic position area from each of the three largest Australian cities. The names, page locations and type of placement strategy of promoted food products were captured, with product healthiness assessed using the Health Star Rating (HSR) nutrient profiling system. Descriptive statistics summarised the page locations of promoted products and the placement strategies used to promote them, and chi-squared tests applied to compare product healthiness by retailer and socio-economic position.ResultsWe recorded 12,152 food products promoted through placement strategies, 99% of which were eligible for a HSR. Overall, 44% of products promoted through placement strategies were unhealthy. Cross-promotions and recommendations was the most common strategy recorded overall (55.9% of all strategies), and advertisements and site content was the strategy most likely to promote unhealthy products (53.7% of products unhealthy). One retailer was more likely to promote unhealthy products (46% v 43%, p = 0.004) and unhealthy products were more likely to be promoted in more disadvantaged than less disadvantaged locations (45% vs 43%, p = 0.05), though the magnitudes of difference were small.ConclusionsA considerable number of unhealthy products are likely presented to online grocery shoppers in Australia. Public health policies targeting unhealthy food promotions may need to be updated, including with consideration of the different ways that products can be prominently displayed online, to avoid exacerbating risks of diet-related disease and health inequalities. Our novel methodology could be used for ongoing monitoring of online supermarkets in Australia and elsewhere to inform such policies.© 2024. The Author(s).

13 keywords...

hide…