Ban Ronald McDonald?

[mistermack]

Children between the ages of 4 and 12 don't make a decision to buy McDonald's food. For the most part, those between the ages of 13 and 16 don't either, but to some extent when they have a few dollars in their pockets they might.

Well, that's ok then. Mcdonalds will have no objection to not targeting children with their advertising then. In fact, if you tell them this, they might pay you a percentage of the millions they will save by not wasting adverts on children.

Or, perhaps, they know something you don't.

The "save the chill'run" mantra is used to justify just about anything these days. The myth is that there is a clear line between "targeting children" and just regular advertisements. McDonalds sells far more food to adults than they do to children. Their advertisements are mainly not geared toward children.

O right. So we're going to see porky mcporsche, and biffo the BMW clown in the near future then. I can't wait.

Why don't people just have the right to eat what they want, and feed their kids what they want?

Nobody is proposing to deny them that right. Your question is bollocks.

Isn't it a tad bit of a waste of time to have a government ministry or agency concerned with whether people eat hamburgers?

I agree in the US it makes sense. If you own shares in McDonalds, and heart clinics, and insulin manufacturers.
In this country, where everyone has government-run health cover, health advice makes sense.

[Coito ergo sum]

Children between the ages of 4 and 12 don't make a decision to buy McDonald's food. For the most part, those between the ages of 13 and 16 don't either, but to some extent when they have a few dollars in their pockets they might.

Well, that's ok then. Mcdonalds will have no objection to not targeting children with their advertising then. In fact, if you tell them this, they might pay you a percentage of the millions they will save by not wasting adverts on children.

Or, perhaps, they know something you don't.

The point was not that they don't advertise to children. They do. The point was that kids don't buy ANYTHING until they have money and the ability to get from home to a store or restaurant. Before that point in time, the parents do 99% of the buying.

The "save the chill'run" mantra is used to justify just about anything these days. The myth is that there is a clear line between "targeting children" and just regular advertisements. McDonalds sells far more food to adults than they do to children. Their advertisements are mainly not geared toward children.

O right. So we're going to see porky mcporsche, and biffo the BMW clown in the near future then. I can't wait.

Adults eat hamburgers. That's why they advertise, like, at the train station:



Most of their advertising is to adults. I didn't say all. Most. And, there is this weird assumption that "targeting children" is something that is obvious in advertising. Ronald McDonald is not necessarily targeted at children - neither is Bob's Big Boy and Wendy at Wendy's or "The King" at Burger King.

Why don't people just have the right to eat what they want, and feed their kids what they want?

Nobody is proposing to deny them that right. Your question is bollocks.

LOL - you'll just have to be clear what regulations you meant when you said that the government should be able to make whatever regulations they want.

Isn't it a tad bit of a waste of time to have a government ministry or agency concerned with whether people eat hamburgers?

I agree in the US it makes sense. If you own shares in McDonalds, and heart clinics, and insulin manufacturers.
In this country, where everyone has government-run health cover, health advice makes sense.

Well, that's one of the issues with government run health care. Suddenly, the government claims a legitimate interest in what you eat, drink, and smoke, and how much exercise you get.

I think we need to separate two different issues: (1) save the chill'run, and (2) the government is paying for your health care and as long as you live under their roof, you will do as they say. The second bit "makes sense" until you realize that the only thing keeping you from being awakened by a computer-generated call to do your morning exercises is 51% of the the voting public....

[Warren Dew]

O right. So we're going to see porky mcporsche, and biffo the BMW clown in the near future then. I can't wait.

While I won't say that none of their advertising is aimed at children, I have to say that Ronald McDonald scared me away from McDonalds much more as a kid when I was much smaller than he was.

Nobody is proposing to deny them that right. Your question is bollocks.

You might want to read the whole thread - thee are definitely advocates of restricting that freedom.

In this country, where everyone has government-run health cover, health advice makes sense.

That would be more compelling if governments didn't have such a track record of giving counterproductive health advice.

[Gallstones]

This debate has become so polarised, it's almost pointless.

I haven't read too much of it, so I hope I'm not just repeating points.
I can see no reason why the people, through their elected representatives, should not place any control they like on advertising aimed at children.

We protect children, we don't just expect them to make the best decisions for their own welfare. It's not some fundamental libery to be able to exploit childrens' innocence and gullibility. We all have a DUTY to protect them. Not just their parents, but the government as well.

In this country, the government spends a lot of money, trying to educate and encourage kids to eat healthily. If a private corporation is spending lots more, trying to get kids to eat shit, I think the people, through their government, has a right to protect kids, and protect their investment in health education.

Children's programming in the US is interspersed with plenty of messages describing and encouraging a healthy lifestyle. Health is taught starting in grade school. They know, they have the information. However, it is the parents and the family who get the first and earliest shot at training and instilling habits--it is not McDonald's et al. Children are at the mercy of their family culture in regards to religion as well as lifestyle.

McDonald's provides a product. The product has wide appeal and they earn a healthy profit. They are but one example of thousands of businesses who provide the same product. It is a business. Businesses provide tax revenue and employment and products and services. Marketing is also a business that provides tax revenue, employment products and services. Marketing is necessary for the success of any business.

Bill Gates has a business too, it provides products that have wide appeal as well as provides employment and tax revenue; and like McDonald's makes charitable contributions. I think they even market to children FFS! I hope the anti-corporation types aren't so hypocritical as to be using, or having purchased, any of his products.

I loathe micromanagement, I loathe nanny state-ism. I will not accept government acting as parent. I will not allow outsiders to impose their morality on my personal choices or my personal business--where those choices and that business do not injure anyone else intentionally.

It seems to me that some socialist minded people practice political dogma not unlike in practice, or mindset, to theistic dogma. It is no less intrusive or authoritative, and no more welcome.



sandinista, tell me, are you a vegan?

[Coito ergo sum]

This debate has become so polarised, it's almost pointless.

I haven't read too much of it, so I hope I'm not just repeating points.
I can see no reason why the people, through their elected representatives, should not place any control they like on advertising aimed at children.

We protect children, we don't just expect them to make the best decisions for their own welfare. It's not some fundamental libery to be able to exploit childrens' innocence and gullibility. We all have a DUTY to protect them. Not just their parents, but the government as well.

In this country, the government spends a lot of money, trying to educate and encourage kids to eat healthily. If a private corporation is spending lots more, trying to get kids to eat shit, I think the people, through their government, has a right to protect kids, and protect their investment in health education.

Children's programming in the US is interspersed with plenty of messages describing and encouraging a healthy lifestyle. Health is taught starting in grade school. They know, they have the information. However, it is the parents and the family who get the first and earliest shot at training and instilling habits--it is not McDonald's et al. Children are at the mercy of their family culture in regards to religion as well as lifestyle.

McDonald's provides a product. The product has wide appeal and they earn a healthy profit. They are but one example of thousands of businesses who provide the same product. It is a business. Businesses provide tax revenue and employment and products and services. Marketing is also a business that provides tax revenue, employment products and services. Marketing is necessary for the success of any business.

Bill Gates has a business too, it provides products that have wide appeal as well as provides employment and tax revenue; and like McDonald's makes charitable contributions. I think they even market to children FFS! I hope the anti-corporation types aren't so hypocritical as to be using, or having purchased, any of his products.

I loathe micromanagement, I loathe nanny state-ism. I will not accept government acting as parent. I will not allow outsiders to impose their morality on my personal choices or my personal business--where those choices and that business do not injure anyone else intentionally.

It seems to me that some socialist minded people practice political dogma not unlike in practice, or mindset, to theistic dogma. It is no less intrusive or authoritative, and no more welcome.



sandinista, tell me, are you a vegan?

[Coito ergo sum]

Nobody is proposing to deny them that right. Your question is bollocks.

You might want to read the whole thread - thee are definitely advocates of restricting that freedom.

In this country, where everyone has government-run health cover, health advice makes sense.

That would be more compelling if governments didn't have such a track record of giving counterproductive health advice.

[Gallstones]

BTW, regarding the targeting of children, my local McDonald's removed the playroom. They are promoting a cafe type image now and added brewed coffee drinks--very distinctly more a targeting of adults over children.

I buy the salads. I even tried the oatmeal. It's good, but I don't see it taking off unless there is a shift in the mindset of customer base--the customers have to want to buy it. Get it, the customers have to want to buy it.

[Warren Dew]

It seems to me that some socialist minded people practice political dogma not unlike in practice, or mindset, to theistic dogma. It is no less intrusive or authoritative, and no more welcome.

Hey, some people gotta fill that empty hole left by lack of religion.

[Coito ergo sum]

BTW, regarding the targeting of children, my local McDonald's removed the playroom. They are promoting a cafe type image now and added brewed coffee drinks--very distinctly more a targeting of adults over children.

What?????

They're marketing brewed coffee drinks??? High in caffeine? High calorie milk and cream based coffee drinks? Some with sugars, chocolates and caramels added?

Burn them! Burrrrrrrnnnnnn them!!!!!

How dare they market stuff that is not good for people? I bet those monsters sell scones and muffins too!!! Those BASTARDS!

[Gallstones]

It seems to me that some socialist minded people practice political dogma not unlike in practice, or mindset, to theistic dogma. It is no less intrusive or authoritative, and no more welcome.

Hey, some people gotta fill that empty hole left by lack of religion.

I am increasingly (small l) libertarian as consequence.

[Gallstones]

BTW, regarding the targeting of children, my local McDonald's removed the playroom. They are promoting a cafe type image now and added brewed coffee drinks--very distinctly more a targeting of adults over children.

What?????

They're marketing brewed coffee drinks??? High in caffeine? High calorie milk and cream based coffee drinks? Some with sugars, chocolates and caramels added?

Burn them! Burrrrrrrnnnnnn them!!!!!

How dare they market stuff that is not good for people? I bet those monsters sell scones and muffins too!!! Those BASTARDS!

No scones or muffins---oatmeal. I know. I bought some. I feel so dirty.

The hot chocolate is suitably delectable--for those who like to feel ashamed of what they do in private--real whipped cream and 500kCal.

[Warren Dew]

BTW, regarding the targeting of children, my local McDonald's removed the playroom. They are promoting a cafe type image now and added brewed coffee drinks--very distinctly more a targeting of adults over children.

I think this highlights another distinction people are failing to make here.

I think the playroom targets parents more than children. It means the parents can take their kids to a McDonalds, dump them in the play room, and have a bit of time to themselves with minimal supervisory effort. More generally, not all advertising with children in it is targeted at the children.

I'd describe the shift you are noting as shifting from targeting parents to targeting singles, or at least the "child free".

[Coito ergo sum]

BTW, regarding the targeting of children, my local McDonald's removed the playroom. They are promoting a cafe type image now and added brewed coffee drinks--very distinctly more a targeting of adults over children.

What?????

They're marketing brewed coffee drinks??? High in caffeine? High calorie milk and cream based coffee drinks? Some with sugars, chocolates and caramels added?

Burn them! Burrrrrrrnnnnnn them!!!!!

How dare they market stuff that is not good for people? I bet those monsters sell scones and muffins too!!! Those BASTARDS!

No scones or muffins---oatmeal. I know. I bought some. I feel so dirty.

But...what if a parent buys their child a coffee? http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/24123703/ ... parenting/

Many kids are apparently drinking coffee....so, maybe McDonald's is targeting them?

[Gallstones]

I started allowing my son to drink coffee at about 8yo. He is an addict now, drinking everyday.

[mistermack]

LOL - you'll just have to be clear what regulations you meant when you said that the government should be able to make whatever regulations they want.

I was PERFECTLY clear. I was talking about advertising regulations. Duuuuuuuh.