U.K. Panel Faults Four BeatBox Drinks for Packaging That Could Appeal to Children

A U.K. alcohol industry panel has upheld a consumer complaint against four BeatBox Products drinks, finding that their packaging could appeal to children and did not make the drinks’ alcoholic nature clear enough.

The decision, announced Friday by the Portman Group, covers BeatBox Blue Razzberry, BeatBox Fruit Punch, BeatBox Juicy Mango and BeatBox Orange Blast. The complaint was filed by a member of the public, who argued that the products’ bright design and juice-box style format made them look too similar to drinks aimed at children.

The cases were reviewed by the Portman Group’s Independent Complaints Panel, which enforces the group’s code on the naming, packaging and promotion of alcoholic drinks in the U.K. The panel found all four products in breach of rule 3.2(h), which says a drink, its packaging and any related promotional material should not have a particular appeal to people under 18. It also found the products in breach of rule 3.1, which requires that the alcoholic nature of a drink be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.

The ruling focused on the overall effect of the packaging rather than any single design feature. The panel said the 330ml Tetra Pak-style carton was not, by itself, enough to create an appeal to minors, even though that type of packaging is not a standard alcohol container in the U.K. and is more often associated with soft drinks. But it said producers should take care when using packaging formats that are also common for children’s and soft drinks.

According to the panel, the four products shared a set of design elements that, when taken together, created a strong youth-oriented impression. Those elements included the BeatBox name in bubble-style lettering, chunky fonts, thick black outlines, bright contrasting colors, fruit flavors and simple cartoon-style images. The panel said the combination of those features, along with the unusual carton format, gave the products a particular appeal to under-18s.

The panel also said the same overall presentation weakened the message that the products were alcoholic drinks. It said the alcohol information on the packaging was printed in small text that was difficult to read and was less prominent than the fruit flavor names and other graphics. In the context of packaging more commonly linked to soft drinks, the panel said the products did not communicate their alcoholic nature with the required level of clarity.

Rachel Childs, chair of the Independent Complaints Panel, said the cases show why regulators look at the full impression created by a package rather than isolating single details. She said the code is not intended to block innovation, but companies that are early adopters of new packaging formats need to be careful when those formats are already familiar to children through non-alcoholic products. She also said the panel welcomed BeatBox Netherlands’ willingness to work with the Portman Group’s advisory service to make changes.

BeatBox Netherlands said it respected the decision but did not agree with the panel’s reasoning. In a statement released through the Portman Group, a company spokesperson said the producer had worked with the regulator to update the packaging and would make sure its products align with the ruling.

The case adds to a long-running debate in the alcohol industry over branding, packaging and the line between novelty and youth appeal. U.K. regulators and public health advocates have paid close attention in recent years to products that use candy-like flavors, bright colors or packaging that can resemble energy drinks, soda or juice. Under the Portman Group system, companies are expected to design products for an adult market and to avoid imagery or formats that could blur that distinction.

The Portman Group was formed in 1989 and describes itself as the alcohol industry’s regulator and social responsibility body. Its code of practice was first published in 1996 and is backed by more than 170 signatories, including producers, retailers and trade bodies. The group says the self-regulatory model has led to more than 170 products being changed or removed from the market and that many more have been revised before release through its advisory service.

The decision is likely to draw attention because carton-style alcohol packaging remains relatively uncommon in the U.K. compared with cans, bottles and other standard formats. The panel’s reasoning suggests that novelty alone is not a breach, but that companies introducing unfamiliar packaging will face close scrutiny if the design resembles products typically sold to children or if the alcohol content is not easy to identify at a glance.

For BeatBox Netherlands, the immediate result is that the four named products will need packaging changes to satisfy the code. For the wider industry, the ruling serves as another sign that regulators are placing increasing weight on how packaging works as a whole, especially when fruit flavors, bold graphics and nontraditional containers combine to shape the first impression a product gives on the shelf.