BPOM regrets ad body's exit from review team<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): The National Drug and Food Control Agency
\n(BPOM) regretted the resignation of the Indonesian Advertising
\nAssociation (PPPI) from the advertisement review team, saying
\nthat the team's function should not have been disrupted.<\/p>\n
BPOM also considered PPPI's decision as one-sided, as the two
\nagencies had been working together for the past seven years in
\nreviewing various drug and food advertisements.<\/p>\n
"We were taken aback by their sudden decision, we had been
\ncooperating very well with them thus far until certain people
\nstarted working for PPPI," Mawarwati Djamaluddin, the permanent
\nsecretary of BPOM told The Jakarta Post.<\/p>\n
She refused to identify the people, who became PPPI's
\ndecision-makers and are believed to have changed the ad
\nassociation's commitment to the ad review team.<\/p>\n
BPOM has yet to decide who is going to replace PPPI and has
\nacknowledged the difficulties of finding representatives willing
\nto participate in the ad review team.<\/p>\n
"We must find those who are willing to be committed to the
\nteam without being paid," Mawarwati said.<\/p>\n
The ad review team, which is supervised by BPOM, consists of
\nrepresentatives from advertising companies, executives of PPPI,
\npharmacologists, psychologists from the University of Indonesia,
\nand also representatives from jamu (traditional herbal medicine)
\ncompanies.<\/p>\n
BPOM does not pay the representatives and their membership is
\nnon-binding.<\/p>\n
According to Mawarwati, the team meets regularly every month
\nto review up to 42 ad proposals. During the period of January to
\nAugust, some 860 advertisement proposals were reviewed.<\/p>\n
The final decision on whether a food or drug ad can be
\npublished is made by BPOM, upon the recommendation of its team
\nmembers.<\/p>\n
Regarding PPPI's allegation that the agency often disregarded
\nits recommendations and made one-sided decisions on publishing
\nadvertisements, BPOM considered the accusation unfair.<\/p>\n
Often, companies disregard the requirement to obtain BPOM's
\napproval before publishing their ads. In other cases, some of
\nthem received approval for their ad proposals but then they
\npublished a completely different version to what had been
\napproved.<\/p>\n
"They are aware of our situation as they are also part of the
\nteam, therefore, whatever problem we encounter is their problem
\nas well," Mawarwati asserted.<\/p>\n
"I admit that we might have some differences in our review
\nmeetings, but we've always considered that as normal," she said.<\/p>\n
Separately, the Indonesian Consumers Foundation (YLKI)
\nsuggested that PPPI position itself as a watchdog on
\nadvertisement ethics now that it had withdrawn from the BPOM
\nteam.<\/p>\n
"It would be in a better position if it could provide
\nobjective feedback for the sake of consumers," Retno Widiastuti,
\nexecutive secretary of YLKI told the Post.<\/p>\n
As consumers are always subject to misleading advertisements,
\nYLKI suggested PPPI establish a control body that would be
\ninfluential in leading public opinion in relation to dubious
\nadvertising practices.(06)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/bpom-regrets-ad-bodys-exit-from-review-team-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}