To Ban Or Not To Ban
Should we ban junk food advertising, like we do with cigarettes? There’s a discussion going on at Scott Kennedy’s blog.
But does anyone honestly think advertising makes them obese? Heck does anyone really think it is junk food that makes them obese? NO! The junk food is not at fault. It’s the misuse of junk-food combined with a lack of exercise… I don’t have all the answers, but the answer is not to ban ordinary people from receiving/seeing junk-food advertising. We don’t stick everyone in prison because some of the population are likely to be criminals, nor should we punish healthy people in this way.
Well I’m not a huge fan of the line being drawn with fat people on one side and “ordinary,” “healthy” people on the other side. Also, the implication that fat people are food criminals is a little disconcerting. But I see what he’s trying to say, anyway. In the comments, someone provides the other perspective:
If [the advertising] does work, then it puts temptation in the way of those who are struggling with weight. “mmm that new pizza looks yummy” Out of sight out of mind? No one actually needs junk food, we can all happily live without it (ok maybe not so happily). Therefore maybe we could all sacrifice needing to know about the latest KFC family pack to take an element of temptation away from those who are struggling.
I know that junk food advertising geared toward children is probably a bad idea. But how about advertising geared towards “ordinary people.” Would it help you not to know that Andes Mint milkshakes exist?
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Advertising
Email us
I do think that there needs to be some acknowledgement of self. It seems like our culture is very much into blaming other people for certain conditions and there is a reluctance towards responsibility towards self which is why these nanny laws sort of bug me.
They bug me a lot actually.
I do hate how we are innundated with commercials promising the next great thing to fufill all of our desires and I do think that people of a certain social economic bracket are particularly suceptible to the advertising barrage out there…
I don’t think the problem is really the commercials but the way in which we believe, as a society that they HAVE that much influence on us. I think more encouragement should be given in thinking for one’s self.
I’ve noticed in the last few years that there has been a decline in logical, reasoning skills being actively taught in schools.
That lack of confidence in thinking for one’s self and acknowledging decisions that we make for ourselves having certain consequences is people submit to advertising in the first place.
It doesn’t bother me to know that it exists or not. I will go to a very few fast food restaurants anymore. I recently tried KFC after being away from it for years, and it made me a little sick to my stomach. Generally that type of food is too salty and not interesting to me anymore. So, I would say bring it on…we can and are bombarded by advertising all the time everywhere, to ban a certain food because it is higher in calories or fat content is disturbing to me.
I also just finished reading Gina Kolata’s book, so I’m squirming about the “misuse of junk food” issue more than about the idea that I will be subliminally influenced to crave a BigMac.
It helps that I dont waste time watching TV, or commercials for that matter. Like Rei, I have a hard time blaming someone else for my cravings and fat. Without TV, I know that there will always be shitty food to consume and crave.
I agree with Lorrie. Should we ban beer and alcohol ads because it tempts recovering alcoholics? We don’t NEED those ads either, but they’re always going to be there and an alcoholic can’t blame a commercial for slipping up, either.
I think blaming advertising is invalid. I quit smoking ten years ago and there are still smoking ads around. My father is sober twenty years and there are still alcohol ads around. I think blaming advertising for being fat/drinking/smoking/having sex with squirrels is an effort to absolve people of making bad choices. I don’t need commercials to tell me chocolate tastes good and to want more of it.
I am on the fence about this one after reading through some of my husbands marketing textbooks. As consumers we are really being manipulated far more than we might realize, especially children. On the other hand, its true that personal accountability is important with food choices as with everything. Personally, I tend to regard crap food ads as not being relevant to me (like ads for athritis or impotency products, for example).
I think the strongest argument for restricting or banning junk food advertising, as some others here have mentioned, is the profound effect tv ads can have on children and teenagers. And I think this applies beyond programming and advertising specifically aimed at children. Normally I am the first to roll my eyes at the “what about the children?” argument when it is applied to something with some inherent artistic value, but I don’t see there being much there to mitigate these ads.
I agree with La Wade, and I would also point out that we no longer allow TV advertisements for hard alcohol, and I have to say that the lack of commercials telling me about what tequila to buy has not noticeably affected my ability to find and purchase tequila.
I remember being a kid in a house where my folks only stocked healthy cereals and stuff, and the only sweet snacks we got were homemade, and I was perfectly happy with that stuff except that I felt like every other kid in the world was eating Cocoa Puffs and Twinkies. Which I knew about from commercials. I also remember my mom mocking the Hostess commercials when they used the word “wholesome,” and pointing out that they didn’t say “healthy” or “good for you,” they just used this silly word that apparently means “not actually full of rat poison.” So I had a good mother who paid attention, but not every kid has a parent who pays that much attention (or has that much sense in the first place, unfortunately).
(I didn’t taste my first Twinkie until I was 26 or 27, and now I’m not so sure about that rat poison part. Blech.)
I don’t believe in the “for the children” argument. I find it an emotional appeal that is applied to everything as a call to action. *I* parent my child and I am responsible for the things she sees or does not see. I teach her how to understand the things she sees and that advertising and television are not real life. That is my job. I don’t rely on the government to make regulations to replace me doing my work as a parent.
KP, parental oversight would be sufficient if all parents were as responsible as you are. But unfortunately, that is not the case, which is why we have many laws pertaining to the health and general well-being of children. Don’t you think society has an obligation to step up where some parents don’t?
I’m coming down firmly on the side of Not Banning. What, does the First Amendment apply only to the things we like, the things we favor? Either it applies, or it doesn’t. Find some legal argument that will support that across-the-board ban, and I might look at it. The government is NOT a nanny.
I don’t buy the “but what about the children” argument either, and I disagree with the “lowest common denominator” parenting argument. Some parents don’t pay attention to what their kids watch on TV, so all parents must be regulated by the government? Where does that logic end? For example, some parents probably don’t have the sense not to let their kids drink coffee – should all coffee advertising be banned?
Secondly, if you ban TV advertising, then other forms of marketing will simply get more aggressive – coupons, toys in the boxes, point-of-purchase displays, print advertisements, billboards, banner ads, radio, product sampling, and on and on. The companies that sell junk food aren’t going to just throw up their hands and say, “oh well, we can’t advertise on TV anymore, so we’ll just hope that people figure out we’ve got a new ice cream flavor.”
Hard alcohol ads are regulated in large part because hard alcohol is regulated, and I can see an argument for regulating beer ads as well, for example. But the idea of “criminalizing” junk food disturbs me — as does the implication that the fat that presumably results from the junk food is criminal in some way.
I’m not for banning–in general, I’m against legislating what doesn’t have to be legislated.
However, when Jefferson foresaw the aristocracy he knew being replaced by a corporate aristocracy, I doubt he could’ve envisioned what we have. Some things we have that I don’t like at all:
1) Advertising as a form of entertainment (cf: the way we look at Superbowl ads, if we watch.)
2) Advertising as a MAJOR component of the budget for any corporation one cares to name, and any product one can name.
3) A causal connection between class and level of education, which tends to go hand in hand with independent thought: those of us whose parents could point out what was wrong with ads are not just smart or lucky or cool–we’re PRIVILEGED. A whole lot of the parents who “use television as a babysitter” or who don’t educate their children to resist advertising behave this way because they have to: because their poverty is such that they aren’t present enough of the time, or because they themselves were never taught to resist. These are both issues of class and wealth (and race, of course.) The ability to question dominant paradigms (“independent thought”) is something we learn, not something we’re born doing. Someone has to teach us. If Mom and Dad can’t, neither McDonald’s nor NCLB has anything to gain by doing so.
4) A causal connection between class (and wealth, and race) and the ability to find and afford non-junk food. The NYT had a fairly chilling article last week about an impoverished Philly neighborhood that was getting an accessible supermarket for the first time in over a decade. Residents said, in so many words, that they hoped to eat better now that they could shop in the neighborhood for something besides KFC; most of them didn’t have cars and had trouble lugging home their bags of potatoes and acorn squash from the supermarket across town on the bus.
So–while I’m not for banning junk food advertising and while it wouldn’t matter if I were because the concept is simply ludicrous in a corporate-dominated culture–I can’t ignore the fact that junk food advertising, like advertising for cigarettes and liquor in its day, targets the vulnerable and the addicted in the pursuit of short term profits, or that that generally means the poor, the young, and those who haven’t had access to the kind of education that would help them to resist effectively. This isn’t about independent thought vs. being a TV drone; it’s about the opportunities for resistance we’re given. Being the captain of one’s fate and the master of one’s soul is a nice idea, but it’s a lot more likely to have practical meaning if one falls into the right class. And the advertisers who knowingly, deliberately prey upon the victims of this stratification are anything but innocent.
I hear what many are saying about the ubiquity of marketing and how it is probably even more pernicious than we realize. I do find that troubling but I still can’t be in favor of banning junk-food marketing. For one thing, I really don’t like that someone else would be deciding what constitutes “junk food.” There are many folks out there who feel that refined carbs are poison and should never be eaten, and I don’t agree with that or with what I view as extreme all-or-nothing attitudes steering our national policy on nutrition–and unfortunately it seems that the people who end up the spokesmen for the “battle against obesity” are almost always just slightly screwed-up or eating-disordered or obsessive (e.g. MeMe post below) which I think contributes to our nation’s weight problem rather than helping to solve it (I’m of the opinion that obesity is largely an issue of our psychology as a nation, not just easy access to junk plus sitting on your butt=fat, though I’m sure the junk and butt-sitting are exacerbating the problem).
I can’t help but see a future where we’re all just as fat but our outward messages and attitude are even more grim, moralistic, and punitive than they are now, and that does not sound fun to me. I always feel like as a society, our weight has done nothing but go up since dieting and reducing became such huge social forces in the 50s or 60s, so although I’m not sure what came first, the chicken or the egg–continuing to try and restrict, restrict, restrict doesn’t seem to be working.
La Wace – No, I don’t think society needs to step in and legislate anything for parents who are not responsible. I think that good nutrition and exercise should be part of the school curriculum (for real, not just two weeks of health class). Like someone else said, where does it end? I don’t want my daughter watching shows like “Bratz” and dressing in the clothing that is marketed to young girls now – should I want those things (or at least the advertising of such) banned? She is four and she asks for these things just seeing other girls with them and without watching commercials. It is a hard battle, no doubt, but I am almost always going to opt for the government staying out of it because every thing that gets legislated for one special interest group opens up the doors for the next one.
My goodness. He’s right in a sense. Why ban junkfood ads? What’s the point? People are still aware that the JF exists. People will still eat the JF. And why? Because people can eat and should be able to eat whatever the heck they want.
I don’t think people understand the obesity epidemic. They picture a fat person sitting at the table wolfing down 6 chicken dinners and then watching t.v. afterwards. That’s not the case at all.
I have lactose intolerance. So actually when I see a new dessert or pizza advertised on TV, I know I can’t eat it or I’ll be sick. So I guess that helps in the way of not eating too much of that stuff. It makes me wonder if I could resist it though, if lactose wasn’t an issue.
Pingback: Big Fat Deal » Ew, Marmite
Nice site. Thank you!!!
Nice site. Thanks.
Cool site. Thank you!!!
Pingback: Big Fat Deal » What You May Have Missed In May
I completely agree with Cat. On the down side, of course, taking into account the cultural toolkit we each have for dealing with the world (particularly as it relates to class and race issues) around us can devolve into blatant paternalism.
How about making everyone sign a consent form before eating a Big Mac or a box of Oreos? (I promise, I kid here.)