Abstract
BACKGROUND: Successive government public health strategies in England have described structural influences of diet-related ill health, including obesity, while emphasising the solution of individual-level change in policy documents. This entrenchment of an individualistic policy paradigm, despite communicating a recognition of structural determinants of health on paper, has been termed "lifestyle drift." The 2020 government strategy, Tackling Obesity, included policies to address structural determinants of health like the physical and digital food environments but ultimately failed to shift responsibility for diet-related ill health onto structural factors. This study uses the contestation of calorie labelling (CL) in the out-of-home (OOH) sector, one of the strategy's only two implemented measures, in English newspapers to investigate how the policy is framed, and the potential role of media framing in facilitating lifestyle drift. METHODS: We systematically searched the Factiva database for articles from 12 UK national newspapers that discussed CL between January 2017 and May 2022, and assessed them relative to inclusion criteria. We then used a combination of reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) and framing theory to qualitatively analyse the framing of policy problems and the solutions meant to address them. RESULTS: A total of 177 articles met our criteria. We found that media framing often reinforced individualism, personal responsibility, and moralisation of behaviour. It also emphasised perceived mixed and inconclusive evidence of CL's effectiveness, unfairness to businesses, and unintended consequences, including negative impacts on the economy and people living with eating disorders. CONCLUSION: Despite an initial shift towards framing interventions to address obesity through a structural lens in Tackling Obesity, CL legislation and accompanying news coverage reflected a drift back towards individualism. To enact effective, structural change to address diet-related public health issues, policy discourses and approaches need to move away from individualising and moralising framing of both public health problems and potential solutions.