Introduction by Croakey: British diver Tom Daley features in all his athletic glory in a Don’t Drink and Dive campaign in the United Kingdom, supported by Malibu and the Royal Life Saving UK. Ostensibly a water safety campaign, it is looks to be an extremely effective marketing exercise for Malibu.
“In eye-catching festive fashion, the winter ‘Don’t Drink and Dive’ initiative sees a series of seasonal lifeguard towers – complete with baubles and jolly decorations – installed in popular inner-city drinking locations near water across London, Manchester and Bristol,” says a company press release released earlier this month (which also spruiks Malibu as “the number one white rum-based coconut liqueur in the world”.)
The campaign is a reminder of the powerful impact of the commercial determinants of health upon drowning prevention and water safety, according to Associate Professor Gemma Crawford, Dr Renee Carey, Professor Jonine Jancey and Associate Professor Justine Leavy. They urge the water safety sector to avoid partnerships with the alcohol sector as they undermine public health.
Gemma Crawford, Renee Carey, Jonine Jancey and Justine Leavy write:
Australia, we need to talk about alcohol and water. Alcohol use in and around waterways specifically. Australians love nothing better than heading to the beach on warm summer days. Shimmering swimming pools or crashing ocean waves often evoke thoughts of fun, relaxation, and recreation. For many, alcohol is linked with those same thoughts.
Alcohol is woven into the very fabric of our culture. But drinking alcohol in and around the water can lead to significant negative consequences, including drowning.
In Australia, alcohol is related to around one in four drowning deaths annually. The most recent National Drowning Report indicates that alcohol was involved in one in five beach and ocean drownings and 14 percent of swimming pool drownings. Intoxication is a leading factor in drowning deaths, contributing to impaired judgment, slowed reaction times and overestimation of abilities.
But for the alcohol industry, aquatic environments are fertile ground for product placement, promotions and sponsorships, connecting their products with activities symbolising freedom, adventure, and relaxation, reinforcing ideas that consuming alcohol is an integral part of this desirable lifestyle.
The industry uses social media, sponsorship, and corporate social responsibility activities to legitimise health-harming practices.
Despite calls to counter the alcohol industry’s influence, the relationship between alcohol and aquatic environments remains largely unexplored.
Commercial determinants
In water safety, consideration of the commercial determinants, the complex and often negative influences of commercial industry on people’s health and wellbeing, is limited.
In a recent Health Promotion Journal of Australia editorial with colleagues from Royal Life Saving Society – Australia (RLSSA) and the World Health Organization (WHO), we called for increased advocacy and policy to address these determinants.
We have been undertaking research funded by Healthway exploring alcohol advertising and its impact on young people in aquatic environments. The WAVE Project brings together a multidisciplinary team of researchers, young people, practitioners and policymakers to advance advocacy efforts and inform policy and practice.
We found frequent alcohol advertising in coastal areas or in connection with aquatic activities. Advertising contributes to what we describe as an aquatic alcogenic environment; the normalisation of alcohol promotion and use in and around waterways.
Findings emphasise the widespread nature of alcohol promotions near water, reinforcing cultural norms that associate leisure and enjoyment with drinking. This can increase risks, especially among young people, who are already overrepresented in drowning statistics.
Associate Professor Justine Leavy, who is leading the research, said: “By addressing the commercial factors that normalise alcohol use in and around waterways, public health efforts can play a crucial role in reducing alcohol-related harm.”
Alcohol companies are firmly embedded in the sporting landscape in Australia, with one in five national sporting organisations having at least one alcohol sponsor.
In the context of aquatic environments, the alcohol industry uses highly stylised imagery featuring beaches, young people, surfing and boating to promote their products, along with traditional marketing tactics at beach-side events, such as on-site signage, promotional merchandise and sponsorship which we frame as ‘water-washing’.
We recently participated in a national mid-way workshop on alcohol and risk for the Australian Water Safety Strategy (AWSS) 2030 where we discussed industry marketing tactics.
What was evident is that across the sector we haven’t yet got to grips with alcohol sponsorship and other forms of marketing, including corporate social responsibility.
But the writing may be on the wall.
Raising eyebrows
In the UK, a recent partnership under the guise of corporate social responsibility is raising eyebrows.
The Don’t Drink and Dive mass media campaign features Olympic diver Tom Daley and encourages Brits to avoid drinking alcohol and stay safe around water.
The campaign is modelled after successful Australian public education initiatives, including the long-running Don’t Drink and Drown campaign managed by Royal Life Saving Society Western Australia and funded by WA Department of Health.
The difference?
The Australian campaign steadfastly avoided a relationship with an alcohol brand, while the UK campaign has embraced the partnership opportunity. The UK water safety organisation’s partnership with Malibu positions the brand as a responsible safety advocate.
But dig a little deeper, and the contradictions emerge.
Malibu’s product – sweet, summery rum – embodies the very lifestyle the campaign claims to mitigate. This double-edged messaging allows the brand to maintain cultural relevance while deflecting responsibility for alcohol-related harm.
The question beckons: who does this really benefit?
For the industry the partnership demonstrates its commitment to public safety and community well-being. Meanwhile, community organisations benefit from an injection of resources and raised public awareness.
But we argue that organisations must see such partnership offerings for what they are: strategic attempts to deflect criticism, sanitise the industry’s image, and secure social capital.
Costs
For community-based organisations, accepting funding or support from alcohol companies may seem pragmatic – but comes at a steep cost.
Funding from alcohol companies often comes with subtle strings, encouraging organisations to temper criticism or avoid promoting stricter alcohol regulations.
Worse, it muddies the message. Public health campaigns warning against alcohol misuse lose credibility when bankrolled by the industry profiting from that misuse.
Community organisations are uniquely positioned to challenge the normalisation of alcohol in aquatic settings. They operate at the grassroots level, where trust is paramount. Accepting alcohol industry funding undermines that trust and compromises the integrity of their advocacy.
As we watch from Australia, the likelihood of the alcohol industry making similar attempts here is high. Conditions are such that this wouldn’t be surprising. Alternative funding sources may be low, community pressure to address alcohol consumption around water may be limited, and practical guidance on conflicts of interest that organisations can apply is limited.
But we remain optimistic. The recent statement from the AWSS workshop calls for approaches that consider the commercial determinants in drowning prevention and water safety efforts.
Partners in the WAVE Project are working to establish a coalition to address action on the commercial determinants of health.
So, as we head into another summer and festive season, it is a timely reminder to stay safe around our waterways, know your limits, wear lifejackets, and avoid alcohol around water.
And our New Year wish?
If aquatic organisations are approached to form a partnership with alcohol industry actors, that they just say no.
About the authors
Dr Gemma Crawford is Associate Professor and Senior Research Fellow for the Collaboration for Evidence, Research, Impact in Public Health (CERIPH), School of Population Health, Curtin University. Co-director of the Drowning prevention Evidence and Evaluation (DEEP) project. Gemma is a Director of the Royal Life Saving Society.
Dr Renee Carey is Senior Lecturer, School of Population Health and Senior Research Fellow for the Collaboration for Evidence, Research, Impact in Public Health (CERIPH), School of Population Health, Curtin University.
Professor Jonine Jancey is at the School of Population Health and Director, for the Collaboration for Evidence, Research, Impact in Public Health (CERIPH), School of Population Health, Curtin University.
Dr Justine Leavy is Associate Professor, Discipline Lead Health Promotion & Sexology and Senior Research Fellow for the Collaboration for Evidence, Research, Impact in Public Health (CERIPH), School of Population Health, Curtin University. Co-director of the Drowning prevention Evidence and Evaluation (DEEP) project. Justine is a Director, Royal Life Saving Society Western Australia.
See Croakey’s archive of articles on the alcohol industry and health
