A little over a year ago I was talking about my crazy nonprofit idea with Chris Berger from Berger Brands. He had just seen Anne Elizabeth Moore at PUSH 2007, thought she was fantastic and that I would really dig her book, Hey Kidz, Buy This Book: A Radical Primer on Corporate and Governmental Propaganda and Artistic Activism for Short People.

Chris was right. A little over a year later and I’m helping promote Moore and her book Unmarketable: Brandalism, Copyfighting, Mocketing, and the Erosion of Integrity.

Moore, who will be in Minneapolis to present at the National Conference on Media Reform, will be reading at Arise! Bookstore, 2441 Lyndale Avenue S., on Sunday, June 8, at 7:00 p.m.

She will also discuss her role as executive director of the Anti-Advertising Agency’s Foundation for Freedom.

The mission of the Anti-Advertising Agency Foundation For Freedom is to bring the best and brightest former ad pros together once a year; inspire young people to leave the craft; focus the industry and public at large on the profoundly negative social justice impacts of advertising; inspire problem-solving methods focused on the most important issues facing the real world; and shine a light on the influence the advertising, media, and marketing industries has on dwindling public space, atrophying human relationships, and the destruction of democracy.

The event is free. Invitation also available on Facebook.

At least a thousand people found their way to Corporate Babysitter via a mention in Salon.com’s Little Girls Gone Wild, an interview with M. Gigi Durham who wrote The Lolita Effect: The Media Sexualization of Young Girls and What We Can Do About It.

If you’re having trouble getting your head around the sexualization of girls, this article is a great place to start. The issues – the narrow definition of sexuality, the acceptance of only “perfect” bodies, the expection to be “hot” but not sexual (in the era of abstinence-only sex education and purity balls) — are clear and concise.

I’m anxious to read the book — especially the what we can do about it part.

Need some real-life examples from advertising/marketing? Check out the posts at Sociological Images (like this one) where we found this:

Susan Linn, Director of the Campaign for a Commerical-Free Childhood, and Joan Almon from the Alliance for Childhood conducted a workshop on creative play at the CCFC Summit in April.

Linn began the workshop with a simple exercise: she held up three puppets, one at a time, and asked us to write down a) what it was, b) what its name was, and c) something it might say.

The first puppet was really just a white sock over her hand with two eyes attached. The second was similar but also had ears and a mouth. The third was a blue, furry monster we all recognized as Sesame Street’s Cookie Monster.

As you may have guessed, the first puppet elicited a variety of identifications, names, and statements from the participants. The second puppet drew a more limited response. Cookie Monster, of course, was a cookie monster and didn’t say too much beyond “Me want cookie.”

This exercise blew me away in its simplicity and its significance, as does Linn’s new book, The Case for Make Believe: Saving Play in a Commercialized World.

Linn is a ventriloquist, among other things. She started as a child, performed on the street corners of Boston and eventually moved on to the Smithsonian and even Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood.  She eventually used her skills and education to become a puppet therapist at Boston Children’s Hospital.

In addition to being the cofounder and director of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, Linn is the Associate Director of the Media Center at Judge Baker Children’s Center and Instructor in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School.

In The Case for Make Believe, Linn does just as she promises: makes a case for childhood play by helping us to understand why it so important for childhood development and making us realize how far away from play we’ve gone:

Play is so fundamental to children’s health and well-being – and so endangered – that the United Nations lists it as a guaranteed right in its Convention of the Rights of the Child. . . . In the United States and other industrialized nations, seduction, not conscription, lures children away from creative play.

Lovable media characters, cutting-edge technology, brightly colored packaging, and well-funded, psychologically savvy marketing strategies combine in coordinated campaigns to capture the hearts, minds and imaginations of children – teaching them to value that which can be bought over their own make believe creations.

Reading the book, I was really struck by the fact that our society does not value creative play. Linn talks about how play has almost been eliminated in schools in favor of government-backed policies that “promote rote learning.”

I asked her, in an email interview, if we should return play to the classroom and how we could do that.

(more…)

Less than 24 hours before the big Mother’s! Day! Celebration! I successfully added at least three more sessions to my six-year-old’s future therapy bill.

I made my daughter cry. Not the regular, no-you-can’t-have-a-second-donut tears but the gut-wrenching sobs of a truly frightened child.

It had already been a trying day. In the morning she was gazing at her Scholastic book order form and wishing for the Care Bear book/stuffed toy combo pack, just like so-and-so has at school.

I’ve gotten pretty good at talking my kids down from these requests, but today she would have none of it.

But mommy, you let me have a Care Bear before . . . .
I know, honey, why don’t you play with that one?
Because the dog took it outside and now it’s ruined!
Oh, well, that’s too bad, honey, but Mommy does not like Care Bears.
But — but — but, the blue one is EVERYWHERE. I see it EVERYWHERE!

Of course she does, I gripe to myself, that’s part of the 17 BILLION DOLLARS spent to make sure she sees it everywhere. So I launch into my usual talk about the toy companies and how they want her to want their toys so that can make money, etc. etc. and we move on.

Later in the day she finds a pair of old sunglasses and brings them to me. She has just learned to read and is proud of it.

Look, mommy, Hello Kitty is everywhere, too! she says, pointing to the words on the side of the sunglasses.

So now I’m annoyed.

Finally, we are getting ready to walk out the door to a birthday party when I hear a crash in the bathroom. She has pulled out a drawer too far and all its contents are spread on the floor. As I help her pick it up, she grabs a small mirror compact, a trade-show giveaway, and says she wants to put it in her pocket.

(more…)

Update: Miss Bimbo off her diet pills.The boys behind missbimbo.com had second thoughts about the messages they were sending their players:

As a result of this rather surprising media attention we have decided to remove the option of purchasing diet pills from the game. We apologise to any players whom this may inconvenience but we feel in light of this weeks proceedings it is the correct action to take.

Can a Bratz doll represent a strong role model? I’m going with “no,” but would like to hear the arguments.

Relaunched Sweet Valley High books have thinner characters. Thanks to Facebook PEM Fan Juliet Ray. Why would Random House a) even think to do this and b) point it out in a press release?

Celebrating Families attacks consumer culture in the U.K. Psychologists Maye Taylor and Helen Sanderson believe parents are unfairly blamed in the media:

They are getting all the responsibility for what is being claimed as a breakdown in family life and all the experts are telling them they are doing it wrong. We are both psychologists and both parents and we thought we would fight back.”

Good idea!

Receiving an actual response from Procter & Gamble reminds me of the all the organizations I haven’t heard back from. Here’s an update of recent past efforts:

Nationwide Children’s Hospital (re: Abercrombie & Fitch naming rights): nothin’
Girl Scouts of America (re: affiliation with Unilever/Axe): nada
HarperCollins (re: publishing Mackenzie Blue): zero
Target (re: snow angel): zilch
Motion Picture Association of America (on ads for PG-13 movies): *crickets*

Commerical Alert offers us another chance to contact HarperCollins and let them know we’re not so thrilled with their new product-placement/advertising-filled books for tween girls by Tina “parents are tweenabees” Wells.

Unrelated: I did hear back from Northwest Airlines after I filed a complaint on their website. They gave me 5,000 miles, too. Now if they can just get me to Boston on time.

I gave myself whiplash reading this New York Times headline: In Books for Young, Two Views on Product Placement.

Product placement? In books? Two views?

Seems Tina Wells (of “Tweenabee“/Buzz Marketing fame) will be writing a new series of books for young girls with a corporate sponsorship component:

In “Mackenzie Blue” . . . a new series aimed at 8- to 12-year-old girls from HarperCollins Children’s Books, product placement is very much a part of the plan. Tina Wells, chief executive of Buzz Marketing Group, which advises consumer product companies on how to sell to teenagers and preteenagers, will herself be the author of titles in the series filled with references to brands. She plans to offer the companies that make them the chance to sponsor the books.

The editors at Jezebel gagged when reading that Susan Katz, publisher of HarperCollins Children’s Books, wasn’t concerned about a “possible backlash against corporate sponsorship in books aimed at such a young audience.”

If you look at Web sites, general media or television, corporate sponsorship or some sort of advertising is totally embedded in the world that tweens live in, Ms. Katz said. It gives us another opportunity for authenticity.

Emphasis mine. In the words of Inigo Montoya, I do not think [that word] means what you think it means.

Alli at Ypulse calls for transparency:

I’ve always advocated for media literacy in schools, but to take it to the next level, publishers of “product-lit” could partner with readers and tell them exactly what they’re doing. Transparency and full-disclosure would empower teens to decide how much they’re willing to participate.

Now there’s an idea.

Okay, product placement aside, what will make these books different from the loads of crappy tween pulp out there now? According to CNNMoney:

Tina Wells . . . was inspired to write the series because she felt it was important for girls to have positive books to read and to encourage them to make good choices. In “Mackenzie Blue,” tweens will discover more about going “green,” learn about the “global” landscape, and be motivated to achieve their goals. Fun and eco-conscious, Mackenzie Blue is an upbeat break from mean-girl culture . . . .

Plus, she’s fashionable. God forbid a girl not be fashionable. There’s no making good life choices without being properly accessorized.

Did I mention that these books aren’t even written yet?

Call to action: Ms. Katz at HarperCollins should know that some people don’t accept that product placement as part of the landscape and will, in fact, not purchase the books or any related products: feedback@harpercollins.com.

And instead of purchasing corporate-sponsored, “product-lit” pulp, choose something from the Amelia Bloomer Project List, which honors the authors, illustrators, editors, and publishers of books that encourage readers to challenge what it means to be a woman, regardless of ethnicity or social-economic background. (via blue milk, via commenter Rachel at Feministe) 

photo courtesy shaycam

Call to action: Tell your senators to vote “yes” on the CPSC Reform Act. (via Consumer’s Union)

Stepped-up safety guidelines from Toys R Us. Authentic? We’ll see.

Chicago Tribune wins George Polk Award for consumer reporting on toy safety. We linked to these articles in a previous Sitter’s Checklist. (via Daddy Types)

“Disney Princess” and RECALL in the same sentence: and it’s not even my birthday! Bonus: “Made in China” and “sold at Wal-Mart.” Fire and burn hazard.