FDF director of communications Julian Hunt said that Which?'s report on marketing to children, which claims that food companies are resorting to increasingly sophisticated and underhand marketing to push unhealthy foods to children, was designed to generate cheap headlines.
"We're seeking to work constructively with NGOs and government on all aspects of marketing to children in the department of healths food and drink advertising and promotion forum," said Hunt.
"It's disappointing that rather than work in this spirit of cooperation and partnership, Which? has decided to generate cheap headlines which don't really help to take the debate forward."
The release of the report comes on the back of the decision by Ofcom, the UK's advertising watchdog, to impose a total ban on high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) food and drink advertisements of particular appeal to children under the age of 16, broadcast at any time of day or night on any channel.
The announcement of the new restrictions on food and soft drink advertising to children on TV is the culmination of a three-year debate on the role advertising plays in establishing eating habits. Although industry groups such as the Advertising Association and the Food and Drink Federation have claimed that the new rules go well beyond creating more protection for primary school aged children, Which? called Ofcom's proposals a 'public health fudge', and demanded a 9pm watershed ban.
The consumer group has also warned of the ability of food makers to get round TV ad bans through new forms of communication.
The Which? report, entitled 'Food Fables', is a continuation of this and examines the tactics used by 12 of the UK's leading food manufacturers to promote, in Which?'s words, " foods high in fat, sugar and salt to kids".
It claims that food manufacturers create clubs that children can join in order to receive sweets and gifts through the post, and indulge in viral marketing that encourage children to register online to compete in competitions. It also claims that junk food manufacturers are teaming up with websites targeted at kids, allowing them access to special promotional content.
"Food marketers are treating children as blank canvases on which to paint their branding; embedding unhealthy food choices from a very young age and adding to the UKs rising child obesity problems," said Which? campaigns and communications director Nick Stace.
"How can parents be expected to give their children a healthy, balanced diet when these sophisticated, underhand techniques are targeting their children often behind their backs? Most of their so-called responsible marketing policies are simply empty rhetoric."
The industry has consistently argued that an ad ban is not the answer. Speaking at the recent CIAA Congress in Brussels, Unilever CEO Patrick Cescau said that the best approach was still self-regulation, and industry bodies such as the FDF have argued that the food industry should be given the opportunity to act responsibly.
But Stace warned that the industry "must show real progress in the next six months. Which? will be keeping the pressure on government to regulate if industry doesnt respond voluntarily to curb these types of promotions for unhealthy food."