The nanny state argument and marketing to kids
Most people who disagree with me and my quest for more regulation on marketing to kids invoke the nanny state argument: Parents, not the state or federal government, are responsible for what their children see/do/buy.
To me, it’s not so much nanny state v. marketing to kids, but more, who is allowed to reach my kids? To teach them? As many would not like the government interfering in our family’s life, I don’t want corporations interfering. And make no mistake, that is exactly what corporate advertising directed at kids is meant to do: Interfere with parenting.
Janice D’Arcy writes about marketing to kids on social networks for the Washington Post:
It cites several new media strategies, such as a McDonalds text messaging campaign, Mountain Dew and Lucky Charms campaigns that ask fans to create their own promotional videos, thus turning marketees into unpaid marketers. My favorite example is of the KFC campaign that embedded a high-pitched sound into advertisements which most adults cannot hear.
If you don’t want the government texting your children, or convincing them to create pro-liberal/conservative videos, or embedding sounds that parents cannot hear into messaging to reach your kids without your consent — why is it okay for corporations to do so?
When do we draw the line?
June 8th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
I was amazed when at my child’s PK fieldtrip, and adult asked each child what their fav resturaunt was… 14 replied McDonalds, and only my child and one other named another eatery. You think McDonalds knows exactly what they’re doing? Of couse they do!! They are experts. Wow.
June 9th, 2011 at 1:35 am
great blog post. truly love it.
June 13th, 2011 at 8:55 am
For me the big issue is that we know two things, 1. Children do not understand the concept of marketing in the same way that adults do. Even adolescents are much more vulnerable as they develop their identities to being influenced by marketing and celebrity 2. Corporations are not now able to get their marketing not only to kids through mobile smart devices, TV, movies, radio, Internet, etc but also in the school setting. Children are overwhelmed with marketing messages and they do not have the developmental ability to know how to deflect these in the same ways that adults do. That concerns me. If parents aren’t concerned, if they don’t understand their child’s vulnerability, then marketers have a free hand, especially when they come into the schools.
June 21st, 2011 at 6:57 pm
Jennifer, that’s why I’m more inclined to support parent education vs. media literacy for kids.
July 13th, 2011 at 11:31 am
I understand, Lisa. I strive to do both, opening parents eyes to what’s happening while teaching them
To engage their kids in becoming active media critics and consumers. I agree that without parent education, media literacy with kids just likely isn’t enough.
August 18th, 2011 at 3:32 am
I don’t get it Amy. It bothers you that most of the kids on the field trip liked McDonald’s? It bothers you that McDonald’s is a popular place for kids to eat? As a kid if I were asked the same question I may have said McDonald’s, but I might have said many different places if given the chance. I remember when I was in grade school, I had to write down what my favourite food was, and noted that most of the kids had said that they loved pizza. (Down with pizza?) As a kid I really liked Hardee’s. (Or Carl Jr’s depending on your place of residence.) I remember Mother taking me there in the morning sometimes before school to get a cinnamon raison biscuit, if time and money allowed. Quite a treat. I remember eating at most major fast food places from time to time except Arby’s, which we didn’t have. It was never about the happy meals, And it was never about the advertisements on the TV. At the time, they were just fun to watch while waiting for the cartoons to come back on.
And I have to disagree with the author. Companies can’t interfere with parenting if the parent says ‘no’. It isn’t the company’s or the government’s job to be a parent. I’m sorry that you are so upset that they are advertising to your kids. My heart bleeds for you. I remember being a kid in the 80’s and 90’s, and when I asked mother for a toy that was being advertised on TV, she would tell me to ask Santa Claus. In other words, no. Not now. I take it that parent’s now who can’t say ‘no’ and let their kids twist their arms into buying something makes it the company’s fault. No one is putting the gun to your head and making you buy the stuff. I’m sorry, but that’s life. It is the company’s job to advertise their product to whatever demographic the product or service is made for. Kids happen to be a demographic companies sell toys, fast food, and cereal to. They don’t really advertise toys to adults, but fast food and cereal is advertised to pretty much all ages. Maybe if companies like McDonald’s shouldn’t advertise to kids then they shouldn’t serve kids either. Then maybe all these ‘think of the children’ watchdog groups can sleep more peacefully at night.
Also, why does everyone gang up on McDonald’s? It’s not as if they are the ONLY fast food restaurant franchise in existence.