About PEMBlogNewsResourcesContact Us
News & Events

Parents for Ethical Marketing
is a young, grassroots organization of people concerned about the effects of corporate marketing practices directed at young children.

Members receive action alerts and a monthly e-newsletter.

Learn More...

News & Events

Virgin Mobile Pulls Back Racy Campaign

Decides it probably wasn't the best idea to encourage kids to strip on YouTube . . . no matter what the cause.

Read More...

 

Game publishers turning more to girl gamers

Think pink! And puppies! And princesses!

Read More...

 

Study Finds Materialism in Children and Adolescents Linked to Self-Esteem

From the Journal of Consumer Research

Read More...

 

Ads on children's social networking sites

Harmless child's play or virtual insanity?

Read More...

 

Pepsi and Coke to reform marketing efforts to kids (maybe)

Plenty of wiggle room under new guidelines.

Read More...

Archive for the ‘Disney’ Category

Sitter’s Checklist: Super Marketing Edition

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008

Does NASA really have to team up with Disney to get kids interested in science and engineering? Of course not. But a partnership will sure help get Disney’s name in more places. Watch for it on a Moon near you!

Speaking of Disney, Sara at Gamine Expedition says that Disney’s new ad lab sends shivers down [her] spine. This is just about as creepy as it gets:

The effort is part of a companywide campaign to bring Disney’s advertising sales strategy into the 21st century as behavioral research is more plentiful in the digital age . . . . television networks have second-by-second viewing data available . . . .

The Writer’s Guild of America thinks that product placements on television shows should be disclosed as they appear. Children’s programming would be a great place to start. (via Murketing)

Even the most vigilant media-aware parents can’t detect it all: Indiana Jones Marketing Defeats JediMom Radar.

Yes, we want corporations to do what they can to make eco-friendly products — but slapping a word on the package (or a phrase on the press release) does not make it so.

Here, the Rainforest Action Network looks at Mattel’s Barbie B-Cause in their Greenwash of the Week (via Feministing):

Interview with author Susan Linn, The Case for Make Believe

Monday, May 19th, 2008

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.

case.jpg

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…)

PBS and Disney Covertly Infiltrate My House, But I Will Fight Back

Tuesday, May 6th, 2008

by Cindy Droog
Reprinted with permission.

A close friend of mine, Tony, who is unmarried, doesn’t have children and lives in an apartment the approximate size of our son’s nursery, came to visit us from New York City a few weeks ago. Our house has changed slightly since his last visit two years ago.

Back then, you could walk through the living room. Today, it’s much more exciting. You can actually skateboard through it by hitting – at just the right angle – an open storybook and sliding to the back door. It’s a quicker trip that way. Not to mention, my balance has improved immensely.

Then, we had a fully stocked bar in the kitchen. Within arm’s reach, we had my favorite Pinot Noir, my husband’s Jack Daniels and ingredients for the perfect 007 martini. And on the bottom shelf, hand-painted cocktail glasses I’d picked up at a market outside Monterrey, Mexico on a business trip.

That cabinet – open shelving and all – now lives in our bathroom, serving as the perfect home for girly and manly shaving creams, living together in harmony. It had no business being in the kitchen anymore, unless we’d planned to stock it with animal crackers. Which by the way, are way too crumbly to use as a substitute for a lime slice in a margarita.

I did have a Sam Adams on hand to offer Tony that day. Of course, I neglected to tell him it had been in the fridge since October.

These changes at my house had been the obvious ones. In fact, my husband and I discuss the pending reopening of our bar – in 18 years – on a regular basis. But Tony made another observation, one that we, frankly, had not noticed.

My son’s coloring book? Handy Manny. His storybooks strewn across the floor? Thomas the Train and Elmo. His current favorite thing to carry around? A Mr. Incredible doll. The crackers he was munching on that day? Scooby snacks.

In completely innocent fashion, Tony said, “Wow! Everything they make for kids today is so commercialized. They must choose the shows they put on TV solely on their marketability as toys.”

(more…)

A sexualized Miley Cyrus? One word: Disney.

Wednesday, April 30th, 2008

The blogosphere is full of discussions about Miley Cyrus and her photos in Vanity Fair. I’m surprised by how many writers find nothing wrong with the photo — but then, they didn’t attend a conference on the sexualization of children recently.

mc4.jpg

With that in mind, here’s some worth reading: At Girl Media Maven, Nancy Gruver has a  great discussion going in the comments of Who’s the Grown Up Here? and a follow-up post where she discusses what all these sexualized images of girls in the media are doing to our girls. And Blue Milk has some terrific visuals to help explain why some of us have been speaking out on this for a while.

mc8.jpg

This is the kind of conversation I’m hesitant to join, because I feel so bad for this 15-year-old girl, heart of an entertainment franchise, and the life she has ahead of her.

But, Corporate Babysitter that I am, I have to say that there’s one thing missing from this conversation: Disney. Disney owns Miley Cyrus (as lifestyle brand Hannah Montana) to the tune of one billion dollars.

mc10.jpg

Now, Disney seems to be upset by the photos:

A Disney spokeswoman, Patti McTeague, faulted Vanity Fair for the photo. “Unfortunately, as the article suggests, a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a 15-year-old in order to sell magazines,” she said.

Emphasis mine. Disney would know something about creating situations to manipulate kids in order to sell something.

mc6.jpg

After all, the Disney Princess machine alone is worth four billion dollars (see Disney Reaches to the Crib to Extend Princess Magic, Wall Street Journal).

mc11.jpg

mc3.jpg

Disney is arguably the greatest marketed brand ever.

mc2.jpg

And for their part in the creation of the Miley Cyrus who appears in Vanity Fair, they should not feign indignation. They should be ashamed.

mc.jpg

On being flexible, or, Introducing Disney Princess Watch

Monday, April 21st, 2008

Q:  What do you get when you schedule a dinner party during TV Turnoff Week?
A:  Two sick girls staying home for the day.

Parenting teaches you nothing if not flexibility. The dinner party will be canceled, we’ll see how the day goes with no TV (usually a treat when someone is sick), and the morning will not be spent writing a planned post.

Instead, I’d like to quickly introduce a new Corporate Babysitter feature: Disney Princess Watch.

The number of licensed character products coming out of Disney is fantastically ridiculous and someday, EVERYTHING YOU BUY WILL HAVE A DISNEY CHARACTER ON IT. Until then, Corporate Babysitter will keep you current with the newest, the most unusual, and the most inexplicable products featuring Disney Princesses and other Disney characters.

Today, the first Disney-branded refrigerated dairy beverage: Disney Little Einsteins Milk.

But as we know, Disney would NEVER imply that their refrigerated dairy beverage would help make your children smarter than, say, anyone else’s refrigerated dairy beverage. That is NOT what they are trying to imply with “Little Einsteins.” No. Of course not. They wouldn’t do that.

From the press release:

“Teaming with Disney provides the opportunity to create healthy products that kids will identify with, while enabling parents to provide a highly nutritional and great-tasting beverage that their children will want to drink,” said Sam Stremick, Director of Sales and Marketing for Stremicks Heritage Foods. “The new Little Einsteins milk line provides parents with an easy option for incorporating nutrients like calcium and DHA into their children’s diets to ensure optimal growth and development.”

Have you ever read such complete bull****? Really? You, Disney and Stremicks, are helping parents by slapping a Disney logo on a carton of milk?

What Mr. Stremick means is that since Disney has mastered the art of a) fooling parents with claims the Einstein products will make smarter babies and b) enticing children to nag for anything Disney, parents will feel okay about giving in to a wailing child in the grocery store screaming “I want Disney milk!”

Disney and Mr. Stremick, guess what? You’re not helping parents.

Read more on the CCFC Summit in my guest post at So Sioux Me.

From the makers of Disney My Baby Princess, Sluts! I mean, Struts!

Friday, March 21st, 2008

Some product managers and their creatives were up just a little too late (and possibly smoking just a little too much) reading the latest Four-Year-Old-Girl-Thought-Leader data:

Says here that four-year-old girls love horses.

Yep. And that they love makeup. And princesses.

And tiny little thongs. Heh, heh. And strappy five-inch heels.

Hey! Wait. One. Minute!

horsemodel.jpg
Genius! 

I’m waiting for the day when one of them says, Maybe we should give those little girls another option.

“Fashion’s back and it’s got a brand new name… Struts!” 
 
The Struts brand is an attitude and a lifestyle for girls who are on the cutting edge of what’s hot in fashion 
 
Struts combine a girl’s natural fondness of horses and her love for fashion dolls.  
 
Struts will be the new buzz word on the playground - the new word of mouth brand with a sense of hipness - Fashion with a Kick! 

FOUR-YEAR-OLDS, people, do NOT have the attitudes or the lifestyles of adults, are NOT on the cutting edge of what’s hot, are NOT hip, and should NOT be classified as word-of-mouth marketers.

Just writing this post makes me feel like taking a shower. 

Fun details and commentary here, here, here, and here.

Disney alters Baby Einstein website, but not because they were making false claims or anything, or, Babies Loves Us

Friday, March 7th, 2008

No matter how much we wish that watching a lot of television was good for kids, it just ain’t.

Especially not for infants. 

A short history of Disney’s Baby Einstein brand problems: Researchers at the University of Washington found that the more time infants spent watching DVDs (like Baby Einstein), the fewer words they learned. Disney disputed the findings. CCFC issued a complaint to the FTC about the educational claims made by Disney. Recently, the Baby Einstein website was redesigned; all indications that the products are educational have been removed.

wrybaby.jpg

Paul Nyhan has a nice summary of the issues behind the revamped website.

“The right thing is to be explicit that this product is intended clearly for entertainment and has no (documented) educational benefits,” said Dr. Dimitri Christakis . . . .

Still, Christakis welcomed Baby Einstein’s changes, though he added, “the best available scientific answers suggest no benefits, and at least the potential of harm.”

One of the problems is that scientists are not keeping pace with the consumption of these media products, Christakis said, and are just beginning to understand the effect of media on infants and toddlers.

The American Academy of Pediatrics suggests no television for children under the age of 2. Baby Einstein said it respects that position but that it doesn’t reflect the realities of modern parenting.

Emphasis mine. Leave it to a mega-corporation to shun academic research, conjour up a ”need,” and convince consumers of the product’s non-existent value to make shareholders and CEOs happy.   

(more…)

Gift ideas for kids: Best to avoid Amazon’s suggestions

Friday, February 8th, 2008

The FTC and a coaltion of advocacy organizations have asked the MPAA to revamp their guidelines in order to stop PG-13 movies (and movie accessories) from being marketed to young children. Young kids should not be watching PG-13 movies — that’s why they’re rated PG-13:

A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements . . . .

Of course, parents know their kids best and should be able to determine if any particular move is suitable for their kids.

But if no PG-13 movie is acceptable for, say, a 3-year-old, then why are those same movie-related toys being promoted to them?

Amazon.com seems to be listing toys in age categories even below the manufacturer’s suggested age restriction. Not good, especially for friends and aunts and uncles who rely on Amazon to help them find an appropriate gift.

poc.jpg

As always, let’s ask: What’s wrong with selling a Pirates of the Caribbean coloring book to two- and three-year-olds (listed on Amazon.com for 2- to 4-year-olds)?

pg13.gif

Because it’s irresponsible to entice kids into wanting something (in this case, to see a movie) that is not appropriate for their age.

Disney and Mattel should know better. They have plenty of other ways to infilitrate our kids’ psyches using age-appropriate toys and movies.

And in this new climate of retailers-are-responsible-too? Amazon better get its act together.