Support NeoGAF

[bggrthnjsus]

But what does that have to do with parenting? Why could it not be attributable to the proliferation of fast food companies, mass subsidizing of cheap crops (corn, soy, HFCS sugar), "time crunch" the standard family (both parents having to work), loss of phys-ed programs? To me it seems pretty unsupportable to just say parents aren't as good any more.

There's actually a study from the john hopkins school of public health that suggests that exercise rates in kids actually haven't changed in the last 20 years. I vaguely recall reading some other study that suggested that obesity rates have risen at rates that are not 100% attributable to parents, or something to that extent.

 

[CrankyJay]

Well, all of the things targeted at children are fine in moderation, so yes my kids can have a happy meal as a treat every now and again. No I don't think we should be restricting who is marketed towards. Do your kids have a job? Do they spend their own money? No? Then why do you care who markets towards them? Do you have no control over you kid?

Some kids get allowances from their parents, so they do have their own money to spend.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

The same as I'd feel of cigarette companies advertising toward children.

Anyone else getting Big Mac ads?

Psychology is GAF's weakpoint, beware.

 

[daw840]

Some kids get allowances from their parents, so they do have their own money to spend.

What exactly is your point? Do most parents just allow there child under 12 to wander up to the local McDonalds every day unsupervised?!? Jesus, I didn't think we were talking about high school kids. I don't think they even eat happy meals...

 

[CrankyJay]

What exactly is your point? Do most parents just allow there child under 12 to wander up to the local McDonalds every day unsupervised?!? Jesus, I didn't think we were talking about high school kids. I don't think they even eat happy meals...

Kids walk to and from school and a McDonalds may be on the way? So they're unsupervised.

 

[daw840]

The same as I'd feel of cigarette companies advertising toward children.

FUCKING LOL

 

[daw840]

Kids walk to and from school and a McDonalds may be on the way? So they're unsupervised.

Wow....either you have no control whatsoever over your kids or your just oblivious to what they are doing.

Or you don't have kids, which is the more likely scenario.

 

[SeanR1221]

Dishabituation plays a MUCH larger role than advertising.

 

[Mortrialus]

FUCKING LOL

I agree. We should allow the sales, marketing, and consumption of cigarettes to children. I'm fine with it because its the parent's responsibility to decide what is best for their children.

Flying Phoenix is just insane.

 

[CrankyJay]

Wow....either you have no control whatsoever over your kids or your just oblivious to what they are doing.

Or you don't have kids, which is the more likely scenario.

Or lots of OTHER parents don't have control over their kids, or let their kids dictate what they want to eat through badgering? It sucks, but it happens.

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Parents need the blame. A food company isn't taking the money out of the adults wallet and forcing the food down thhe kids throat.

 

[bggrthnjsus]

Oh, it's real easy to create regulations. Whether or not those are useful in the least are another story. It's odd that we're both giving too much and too little credit to advertisers ITT. They hold too much sway! They must be regulated! No parent can compete! Ah, but let's slap down some laws and there is NO WAY they'll be able to market to kids! They're stupid all the sudden because my point demands it!

Well, kids are stupid when it comes to advertising, and there are plenty of studies that show kids are powerless against advertising. Kids do not understand the concepts behind advertising until past a certain age (see the AAP policy statement in the OP, there are some good references there). Recent studies have shown that children do not even understand that commercials are 'selling' them something until 7-8, and that they do not understand the concept of commercial persuasion until 11-12 (ref). I don't think there is much to debate over whether kids 'get' ads or not. Whether or not the parents can compete is another story, and I don't think it's one or the other. More likely that there has been some change in parenting over the past few decades, in addition to a rise in advertising, which compound one another. I just think that it is more practical to target that which can be regulated in the short term, while trying to correct the parenting in the long term.

 

[daw840]

I agree. We should allow the sales, marketing, and consumption of cigarettes to children. I'm fine with it because its the parent's responsibility to decide what is best for their children.

Flying Phoenix is just insane.

As a 12 year, pack a day, smoker who has successfully quit for 2 months now I can tell you that McDonalds and Cigarettes are so far removed from each other it is ridiculous. A comparison that makes you sound like a complete retard.

Or lots of OTHER parents don't have control over their kids, or let their kids dictate what they want to eat through badgering? It sucks, but it happens.

Well, why should we be legislating knee jerk reactionary bullshit like this? I mean, when does personal responsibility end and government legislation begin? Where do we stop?

 

[CrankyJay]

Well, why should we be legislating knee jerk reactionary bullshit like this? I mean, when does personal responsibility end and government legislation begin? Where do we stop?

Because there is precedence from other countries and the sky hasn't fallen?

 

[bggrthnjsus]

What exactly is your point? Do most parents just allow there child under 12 to wander up to the local McDonalds every day unsupervised?!? Jesus, I didn't think we were talking about high school kids. I don't think they even eat happy meals...

well i was going to mcds unsupervised when i was 12

 

[slidewinder]

knee jerk reactionary bullshit like this: "I mean, when does personal responsibility end and government legislation begin? Where do we stop?"

Fixed.

 

[The Technomancer]

This is the ideal scenario.

Now let's talk about the real scenario.

Like I posted above from my experience, the majority of parents out there are weak. If the advertising is strong enough to affect the majority, then society has a responsibility to enact laws to protect the majority.

This is whats sometimes annoying about these threads. Just because parents should be strong in theory doesn't mean the human race isn't being damaged because they aren't.

 

[daw840]

Fixed.

God, I didn't know the punctuation Nazi was monitoring this thread!

 

[Mortrialus]

As a 12 year, pack a day, smoker who has successfully quit for 2 months now I can tell you that McDonalds and Cigarettes are so far removed from each other it is ridiculous. A comparison that makes you sound like a complete retard.

As a four year, pack a day smoker who has successfully quit for a year I can tell you that that soda and junk food are much more difficult to kick and that they actually aren't that different as you assume.

Anecdotal evidence is fun, isn't it?

Besides, I honestly feel we should deregulate cigarettes, alcohol and pot. I thought you agreed.

 

[bggrthnjsus]

As a 12 year, pack a day, smoker who has successfully quit for 2 months now I can tell you that McDonalds and Cigarettes are so far removed from each other it is ridiculous. A comparison that makes you sound like a complete retard.

While I agree that they're different, they're not that far removed. Both have/had advertising aimed at building child brand loyalty. Both are directly linked to health issues. It was easier to stop cigarette advertising because they were aimed at developing illegal habits (for children anyway)

 

[SolKane]

Well, kids are stupid when it comes to advertising, and there are plenty of studies that show kids are powerless against advertising. Kids do not understand the concepts behind advertising until past a certain age (see the AAP policy statement in the OP, there are some good references there). Recent studies have shown that children do not even understand that commercials are 'selling' them something until 7-8, and that they do not understand the concept of commercial persuasion until 11-12 (ref). I don't think there is much to debate over whether kids 'get' ads or not. Whether or not the parents can compete is another story, and I don't think it's one or the other. More likely that there has been some change in parenting over the past few decades, in addition to a rise in advertising, which compound one another. I just think that it is more practical to target that which can be regulated in the short term, while trying to correct the parenting in the long term.

Additionally, parents are just as susceptible to advertising as their children. Point being, parents are just as much consumers as their children - the things getting advertised to parents will implicitly also be advertised to children, regardless of children being the target market. Granted parents can make more informed decisions, but what consumer is truly rational in their decision making?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eatingwell/is-posting-calorie-counts_b_837463.html

 

[bggrthnjsus]

Dishabituation plays a MUCH larger role than advertising.

This too. Well I don't know if I'd say MUCH larger, but it's definitely a big role.

 

[travisbickle]

Wow....either you have no control whatsoever over your kids or your just oblivious to what they are doing.

Or you don't have kids, which is the more likely scenario.

It's not about him having kids, it's about society as a whole having children and what effect advertising and the role of food companies has on them.

 

[daw840]

This is whats sometimes annoying about these threads. Just because parents should be strong in theory doesn't mean the human race isn't being damaged because they aren't.

Damaged how? Obesity actually caused by fast food? That's very debatable. You know what I just learned how to cook? Chicken Alfredo. You want to know how many calories are in the home-made alfredo sauce that I make? No, you don't want to know, but you'll want more of it if you eat it. My grandma, who is from the south, never made a healthy meal in her life. Every time I ever ate something she cooked I probably ingested 1500 calories in one sitting and it was fucking delicious. She has now passed on, from lung cancer ironically (smoker), but my grandpa who has been eating like this for 60 years is still kickin at 90. You want to know why? Because he's not a lazy fuck and is always doing something always burning calories.

That is the problem with today's society. We don't burn enough calories because everyone is lazy as hell (compared to the past generations) and wants to consume the same amount of calories as we have for decades.

 

[daw840]

Besides, I honestly feel we should deregulate cigarettes, alcohol and pot. I thought you agreed.

Wait a second....so you feel that those things should be deregulated but a double cheeseburger should be more regulated?!?

Spoiler

I agree on the alchohol and pot front, not so much the cigarettes though. ALthough only for selfish reasons, since I don't want to pick up the habit again.

 

[CrankyJay]

That is the problem with today's society. We don't burn enough calories because everyone is lazy as hell (compared to the past generations) and wants to consume the same amount of calories as we have for decades.

NO!

No, that's one half of the obesity problem. They didn't have super-sized meals decades ago.

According to a 2007 paper published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, portion sizes offered by fast food chains are two to five times larger than when first introduced. When McDonald’s first started in 1955, its only hamburger weighed around 1.6 ounces; now, the largest hamburger patty weighs 8 ounces, an increase of 500 percent.

Read more: http://www.divinecaroline.com/79975/49492-portion-size-vs-now#ixzz1HTk2zb9J

 

[Like the hat?]

I don't think anything should really be advertised directly toward children, but I know that's impossible to ever stop. I just hope I'll be able to teach my son to make good choices.

 

[daw840]

NO!

No, that's one half of the obesity problem. They didn't have super-sized meals decades ago.

http://www.divinecaroline.com/79975/49492-portion-size-vs-now

Maybe not at fast food restaraunts but I guarantee you that the meals cooked at home were supersized. Maybe not in portions but in caloric and fat content. You know, so you would put some meat on them bones. A growing boy needs to eat!


edit: Furthermore, who are you to say that a company can't give the people what they want? Obviously that's what the American people wanted and are buying. No one is forcing a 20 piece nugget down anyones throat.

 

[CrankyJay]

Maybe not at fast food restaraunts but I guarantee you that the meals cooked at home were supersized. Maybe not in portions but in caloric and fat content. You know, so you would put some meat on them bones. A growing boy needs to eat!

True dat man...but when at home you also probably control how much you put on your plate.

I know when I go out to restaurants I feel compelled to eat the whole damn thing because I don't like taking leftovers home and I don't like wasting food.

I admit sometimes I have self-control issues.

 

[SolKane]

That is the problem with today's society. We don't burn enough calories because everyone is lazy as hell (compared to the past generations) and wants to consume the same amount of calories as we have for decades.

Prove this. As it stands now, Americans work more hours and are more productive than they have been in history.

 

[Mortrialus]

Damaged how? Obesity actually caused by fast food? That's very debatable. You know what I just learned how to cook? Chick Alfredo. You want to know how many calories are in the home-made alfredo sauce that I make? No, you don't want to know, but you'll want more of it if you eat it. My grandma, who is from the south, never made a healthy meal in her life. Every time I ever ate something she cooked I probably ingested 1500 calories in one sitting and it was fucking delicious. She has now passed on, from lung cancer ironically (smoker), but my grandpa who has been eating like this for 60 years is still kickin at 90. You want to know why? Because he's not a lazy fuck and is always doing something always burning calories.

That is the problem with today's society. We don't burn enough calories because everyone is lazy as hell (compared to the past generations) and wants to consume the same amount of calories as we have for decades.

Its amazing how cowardly and ill informed you are, almost exactly like a creationist. Just look at the literally hundreds of scientific studies showing the psychological effects advertising has on children before the age of reason and the effects it has on their parents' buying habits. Look at how advertisers are using said studies to create more effective and insidious advertising. Just look at the childhood obesity differences between the U.S. that does allow said advertising to children before the age of reason, and those that do not.

All you can do is offer anecdotal evidence about your smoking and your grandma. You and your ignorance on the topic have absolutely nothing to offer in this thread.

Wait a second....so you feel that those things should be deregulated but a double cheeseburger should be more regulated?!?

Spoiler

I agree on the alchohol and pot front, not so much the cigarettes though. ALthough only for selfish reasons, since I don't want to pick up the habit again.

I'm being sarcastic.

Also, that is a straw man. I never said ban double cheese burgers. I am against advertising food towards children, as well as the usage of licencing popular characters such as Spongebob on food such as the Spongebob Macaroni and Cheese.

I do want to see the age of drinking to be 18, and pot to be legalized and the age to be 18.

 

[CrankyJay]

Prove this. As it stands now, Americans work more hours and are more productive than they have been in history.

That depends on the job, doesn't it? You don't really burn that many calories working a desk job.

 

[WanderingWind]

Its amazing how cowardly and ill informed you are, almost exactly like a creationist. Just look at the literally hundreds of scientific studies showing the psychological effects advertising has on children before the age of reason and the effects it has on their parents' buying habits. Look at how advertisers are using said studies to create more effective and insidious advertising. Just look at the childhood obesity differences between the U.S. that does allow said advertising to children before the age of reason, and those that do not.

All you can do is offer anecdotal evidence about your smoking and your grandma. You and your ignorance on the topic have absolutely nothing to offer in this thread.

You should talk about his mom next! That'll prove your point!

...stop with the personal attacks.

 

[SolKane]

That depends on the job, doesn't it? You don't really burn that many calories working a desk job.

It's not about calorie burning it's about the claim that this generation is lazier than previous generations. You know that.

 

[J-Rod]

Kids aren't defenseless against advertising, and they are completely unable to act on it. I don't think this is just part of the parent's responsibility, but 100%. If children raised themselves or were the decision makers of the household, then my opinion would be the opposite. Every time we drove by a Chuck E Cheezes, I said I wanted to go, and almost always my parents said no. It's not worth censoring more crap just because some people won't say that to their kids.

 

[daw840]

Its amazing how cowardly and ill informed you are, almost exactly like a creationist. Just look at the literally hundreds of scientific studies showing the psychological effects advertising has on children before the age of reason and the effects it has on their parents' buying habits. Look at how advertisers are using said studies to create more effective and insidious advertising. Just look at the childhood obesity differences between the U.S. that does allow said advertising to children before the age of reason, and those that do not.

All you can do is offer anecdotal evidence about your smoking and your grandma. You and your ignorance on the topic have absolutely nothing to offer in this thread.



I'm being sarcastic.

Also, that is a straw man. I never said ban double cheese burgers. I am against advertising food towards children, as well as the usage of licencing popular characters such as Spongebob on food such as the Spongebob Macaroni and Cheese.

I do want to see the age of drinking to be 18, and pot to be legalized and the age to be 18.

Wow dude, you can fuck straight off calling me a creationist. No reasonable discourse can be had with you as you obviously are a complete fucktard unable to control yourself. If your dumbass thinks that advocating some personal responsibility means that I am way off base then I don't know what to tell you.


If you don't have the willpower to have children and stop them from buying every new gadget and toy that is the new hotness, then you don't need to be having children. Hell, if you let your kids watch that much TV that they are so out of their minds about the advertising then your kids should be taken away from you if you have them.

 

[bggrthnjsus]

Kids aren't defenseless against advertising, and they are completely unable to act on it. I don't think this is just part of the parent's responsibility, but 100%. If children raised themselves or were the decision makers of the household, then my opinion would be the opposite. Every time we drove by a Chuck E Cheezes, I said I wanted to go, and almost always my parents said no. It's not worth censoring more crap just because some people won't say that to their kids.

Do you have any evidence for kids having defenses vs. advertising or are you just saying it? Because there is plenty of scientific evidence that argues that kids do not. Most of the arguments I've seen here (on either side) aren't really backed with any real evidence. I think I posted the only real evidence against what I am in favor of, and that is the FTC document (http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/beales/040802adstokids.pdf).

 

[daw840]

Kids aren't defenseless against advertising, and they are completely unable to act on it. I don't think this is just part of the parent's responsibility, but 100%. If children raised themselves or were the decision makers of the household, then my opinion would be the opposite. Every time we drove by a Chuck E Cheezes, I said I wanted to go, and almost always my parents said no. It's not worth censoring more crap just because some people won't say that to their kids.

Wait...an actual well reasoned response?!? Holy hell!

Companies have been targeting children with advertising for FAR longer than this has been a problem. The difference is that our parents didn't fall for that shit. This newer generation of parents are pussies to a degree that is laughable.

 

[bggrthnjsus]

Also I should point out that the point of the house meeting I was at wasn't to get any kind of government regulation, it was actually more to get people to petition McD's to stop some practices voluntarily.

 

[lunarworks]

As much as I agree with the sentiment of banning fast food ads aimed at children... Ronald McDonald and friends were a big part of my childhood

 

[blame space]

advertising is produced to persuade, and children are extremely susceptible to persuasion.

no, parents aren't forced to purchase the things their children have been persuaded to want by advertisements, but that's not really a persuasive argument for corporations' right to advertise to them. unhealthy foods are especially reprehensible, to me, because kids don't know shit about food.

 

[bggrthnjsus]

Wait...an actual well reasoned response?!? Holy hell!

Companies have been targeting children with advertising for FAR longer than this has been a problem. The difference is that our parents didn't fall for that shit. This newer generation of parents are pussies to a degree that is laughable.

Again, show me evidence that people are more susceptible to advertising now than before, and it is not because of a change in the amount of advertising.

As much as I agree with the sentiment of banning fast food ads aimed at children... Ronald McDonald and friends were a big part of my childhood

Me too (actually one of the reasons I am not 100% convinced lol)

 

[blame space]

As much as I agree with the sentiment of banning fast food ads aimed at children... Ronald McDonald and friends were a big part of my childhood

ok how in the hell was the McDonald's cast of cartoon characters a "big part of your childhood"?

 

[daw840]

advertising is produced to persuade, and children are extremely susceptible to persuasion.

no, parents aren't forced to purchase the things their children have been persuaded to want by advertisements, but that's not really a persuasive argument for corporations' right to advertise to them. unhealthy foods are especially reprehensible, to me, because kids don't know shit about food.

But what does that have to do with anything? When I was a kid, up until I could drive, it was extremely rare that any meal that I ate was not known by my parents. I mean, I can totally see the point if McDs was bringing double quarter pounders in middle schools and selling them for cheaper than the healthy food. That would be crossing the line completely, but for crying out loud the amount of babysitting that people want is retarded. No one takes responsibility for their own actions anymore and it shows. 40 years ago this conversation would have been embarassing.

 

[slidewinder]

It's not worth censoring more crap just because some people won't say that to their kids.

Don't we as a society already censor plenty of crap because of what people want to or don't want to say to their children?

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

ok how in the hell was the McDonald's cast of cartoon characters a "big part of your childhood"?

Birthday parties held in their restaurant, etc. This was possible in the U.K. back in the 90's. No one every did this in America?

 

[CrankyJay]

Pester Power

"We're relying on the kid to pester the mom to buy the product, rather than going straight to the mom." - Barbara A. Martino, Advertising Executive

Today's kids have more autonomy and decision-making power within the family than in previous generations, so it follows that kids are vocal about what they want their parents to buy. "Pester power" refers to children's ability to nag their parents into purchasing items they may not otherwise buy. Marketing to children is all about creating pester power, because advertisers know what a powerful force it can be.

According to the 2001 marketing industry book Kidfluence, pestering or nagging can be divided into two categories—"persistence" and "importance." Persistence nagging (a plea, that is repeated over and over again) is not as effective as the more sophisticated "importance nagging." This latter method appeals to parents' desire to provide the best for their children, and plays on any guilt they may have about not having enough time for their kids.

http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/marketers_target_kids.cfm

Also, a video on the power of nagging: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-KwCNOg0qs

 

[lunarworks]

ok how in the hell was the McDonald's cast of cartoon characters a "big part of your childhood"?

"Big" may be a bit of an exaggeration, but the ads were on TV a whole lot, so the characters were pretty much as familiar to me as Bugs Bunny and the like.

 

[blame space]

 

[daw840]

http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/marketers_target_kids.cfm

Also, a video on the power of nagging: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-KwCNOg0qs

So, all this proves is that people in general have become weak pussies in the last 2 decades. If you fold to your CHILD nagging you every time they want something then your kid will be like....well will be like every other little punk brat out there right now.