A rather "insightful" article at Forbes (and yes, you should read the word in quotes as being extremely sarcastic) points out that kids watching t.v. are seeing advertisements that promote stuff like obesity...you know, ads by high calorie, low nutritional foods...hmm...poor nutrition (I think we just covered that. The incidence of broccolli and beef commercials to sugar and high sugar foods is, I think it is safe to say...fairly low), alcohol (you mean those ubiquitous beer ads using strains from the most popular music of the day?) and tobacco...well, okay so on this one, I can't remember the last time I saw a pro-cigarette ad...
Okay, so they are arguing kids seeing ads promoting bad diets and bad liquid consumption behavior could have a negative impact. I am on board with that. I guess where I take issue is someof the solutions suggested:
Advocate for confining ads for erectile dysfunction drugs to after 10 p.m.
I am definitely on board with restricting those ads. Completely. From the sheer volume and annoying factor of those ads I can't believe there is a male in America who can follow the sage advice of Smoky and "Let's Get it On" without medical aid. Pity the poor female who thinks just her personality, smile, breasts or butt might convince a guy to make love to her. If he has no access to a pill promising possibile erotic behavior...and 36 hour erections, by the by...well, what chance does he have?
What I fail to understand is how seeing or not seeing those ads changes nutritional, tobbacco or alcohol consumption behavioral changes. Completely irrelevant to the topic. Of course, it could be even MORE off-topic:
Work with the entertainment industry to make advertising for birth control more widely disseminated on network TV, among other things.
Huh? Which bit of the advertising is that associated with? Does taking birth control make you suddenly eat better? Or less inclined to smoke or drink? I would assume it is, in all three cases, actually exactly the reverse. Of course...hardly any of this matters since they are talking about ads directed at KIDS. Not adults out their bounsing each other with their little blue pills they only know about because of the approximately 20 hours of erectile dysfunction corrective options programming we see each day...kids!
I wish I could argue that this is just an article about a special interest group working to mold society in their image through yet another slanted news report but it is hard to argue that when the lead sentence is
Children and adolescents are being bombarded by so many ads that medical experts now fear for their health. and the closing paragraph is
Shifrin is hopeful that change will come. "Food marketing to children is already changing," he said. "We're for progress, but we're hoping to increase awareness that this has a significant effect on youngsters' health."
Someone is going to have to work awfully hard at obscuring truth to convince me that erectile dysfunction solution ads declining and birth control option ads increasing will in any way, shape or form affect how kids eat, consume alcohol and/or nicotine. This is idiocy at its finest. Misleading, misrepresentative, and illogical. Well done, HealthDay News and Forbes.com.
all items in italics are quotes from the linked article.
4 years ago
2 comments:
"I can't remember the last time I saw a pro-cigarette ad..."
That's because it's illegal to show cigarette ads on tv.
And how is a birth control ad any better than an "ED" ad? They both encourage kids to have sex. (The manner in which the ED ads encourage kids to "do it" may not be readily apparent so I will expound. They encourage it by making the activity a subject which is not taboo for kids. Anything that kids will talk about many kids will do.Also by making it seem to be absolutely vital to a relationship.) And they're both extremely offensive. (As always offense and it's degree is subjective.)
That's so funny! I'd love for them to ban erectile dysfunction ads...I'd never have to listen to Bob Dole again :O
Post a Comment