Ofcom made a decisive move today, banning junk food (HFSS) adverts in and around programmes aimed at the under-16 crowd. You know, the fat kids who sit around and watch too much television. Ofcom deserve credit - it had to navigate in a highly contested policy arena, with great scrutiny over its actions and in particular the evidence that supports them. We’ll see how this turns out.

Ofcom’s approach appears on the surface to be comprehensive, converged and seamless. It’s not. Consider two key areas:

* The new media: Ofcom’s actions generally cannot stop a new media outlet from evading the junk food adverts ban. Does this mean we will start seeing Doritos adverts on myspace.com? Who knows? Basic economic theory says that if Doritos, Cadburys and Coca-Cola generate significant revenues from selling to under 16s, they will try to reach them somehow and influence their purchasing decisions. Ofcom and the UK government can block some of those routes to the consumer, but not all of them. Don’t sell your Coca-Cola shares just yet.

* The soon-to-be-revised AVMS Directive: You might note that Ofcom’s new policy for junk food adverts can only legally apply to those broadcasters licensed by Ofcom. Under the TVWF / AVMS ‘country of origin’ principle, Ofcom generally cannot require a broadcaster licensed in another EU country to comply with these rules. This holds true for other Ofcom policies as well … so it might be interesting to see if a speciality channel relocates to another EU country but still broadcasts to U.K. consumers, esentially side-stepping the regulations. There are policies that prevent the abuse of the country or origin principle, so it is possible these will be tested as well. I personally doubt a broadcaster would relocate over this issue, particularly given Ofcom’s credible approach in this matter.