Who's to blame for the U.S. obesity epidemic?
DATELINE: FOOD FIGHT |
Sign up for the newsletter |
|
Related stories |
Once upon a time, food commercials targeted mom. Today, food marketing aimed directly at children is a $10 billion dollar industry. And two-thirds of Americans polled say it’s a major contributor to childhood obesity.
Susan Linn, psychologist: Kids are bombarded with marketing from the moment they get up in the morning to the moment they go to bed at night.
Harvard psychologist Susan Linn calls it “brainwashing” and wants it to end. So she joined with concerned parents and advocacy groups to serve notice, that they intend to sue cereal-makers and children’s TV channels—for marketing unhealthy food to kids.
Linn: There’s no moral, ethical or social justification for marketing junk food to kids. I mean it’s not good for them.
A typical child sees 40,000 commercials a year. More than half of them for fast food, candy, soft drinks, and sweetened breakfast cereals.
But TV is just the beginning.
Linn: Pepsi and Coke, they both say that they do not market to children, I think under the age of 12. And there is a Pepsi car for kids as young as four.
Stone Phillips, Dateline anchor: Yeah, age four and up. (reading toy box)
Food is turned into toys — or attached to toys — or just squirts out like a toy like the latest ketchup bottles.
Phillips: The food plate and the toy shelf are starting to look a lot alike?
Linn: It’s a merger, yes.
And then there’s the Internet.
A growing number of popular online gaming sites are owned or sponsored by the food industry.
Lauren, panelist: The Nabisco site. My little brother’s 13 and could live on that Web site. Like you just play. And it’s like all the different snack foods are all fun games.
Children spend hours on these sites, exposed to what critics slam as stealth advertising, slipping past parents to reach the kids.
Linn: And, you know, what the industry does that is so distressing is that they really prey on parents’ best intentions.
Like encouraging kids to read, or learn math.
Linn: (Holding up a Cheerios book) And if you look at the cover, the cover looks just like a box of cereal. The M&Ms book looks just like a box of M&Ms.
Companies say it helps kids learn. And there’s nothing wrong with that. But critics argue companies actually make a concerted effort not to help parents, but pit kids against parents.
Linn: In 1998, this company called Western Media International did a study on nagging. It was not a study to help parents cope with nagging. It was a study to help corporations help children nag more effectively.
Phillips: How many of you have heard the term nag factor? Or pester power? These are actual marketing terms, for targeting children with advertising.
Ken Robinson, father: Now I will break down quicker than my wife. So what happens, they’d rather ride or hang with me.
Kenbria Robinson: Yeah.
Ken Robinson: I’m guilty.
And many parents say the ultimate battleground is point-of-sale. Beware: the gauntlet of the cereal aisle!
There are a lot of familiar faces on cereal boxes: Shrek, Nemo, Batman, Dora, Woody from Toy Story, Barbie, SpongeBob Square Pants.
Madison Avenue calls them spokescharacters. Their licensing has become an enormous business.
We discovered the enormous swaying powers of spokescharacters when we sent NBC’s Hoda Kotb to a pre-school in New Rochelle, New York. A consultant in child education helped us devise a little game.
First, we asked three and four year olds to choose between a cupcake with the American flag and one with a familiar cartoon character. Almost all the kids picked a character over the red white and blue.
So we upped the ante and went for the battle parents lose all the time—a fattening dessert versus fruit. We asked these pre-schoolers to choose between a cupcake and a banana. This time, we recruited Scooby and Shrek to pitch the fruit.
Most went with what Shrek and company seemed to endorse. So finally, to see just how far these characters could sway kids, we asked: what would they rather have for breakfast? A banana or... a rock? We decorated the rock this character stickers this time.
|
It seemed pretty clear companies can count on Scooby-Do when they’ve got some work to do. An overwhelming majority went straight for the rock.
Phillips: We grew up with Tony the Tiger.
Linn: We did.
Phillips: And Captain Crunch and Sugar Bear. Now it’s Elmo or now it’s Shrek. Why is it so different?
Linn: It’s changed in volume and intensity and sophistication. That’s what’s different.
It’s not just advocates saying this. A recent year-long study by the National Institute of Medicine concluded today’s food advertising to children influences kids to make poor diet choices.
In the face of mounting criticism, food makers and marketers are responding. Food companies are reviewing their policies. And advertisers have asked the industry’s self-monitoring board to come up with clear guidelines about how to market snack foods and sweets to kids.
Still, critics point out that the ad industry’s review board has no enforcement power.
Phillips: But isn’t the choice of what to buy and feed kids up to parents ultimately?
Linn: It’s easy to blame parents. It’s not a level playing field. I mean how can one family take on, a ten to 12 billion dollar industry that’s food marketing to kids? How can they do it?
Phillips: By saying no. By doing what they ought to do as parents.
Linn: It’s hard to keep saying no over and over and over. It’s hard to be a parent. Why are we letting food companies make it that much more difficult? Especially when there’s so much at stake I mean the health of our children.
- Discuss Story On Newsvine
-
Rate Story:
View popularLowHigh - Instant Message
MORE FROM FOOD FIGHT |
| Add Food fight headlines to your news reader: |
Sponsored links
Resource guide



