RuleBritannia wrote:People don't buy fast food because it's advertised on TV, they buy it 'cause it's fast and easy.
Actually, they do both. They do buy fattening junk food because it is fast and easy, and they do buy more of it because its availability is constantly brought to their attention. If the latter wasn't the case, there'd be no point in advertising, would there?
As for the claim that junk food companies are only trying to steal market share from each other flies in the face of what capitalism is about.
And in any case, no one here would be advocating a reduction or limitation on only McDonald's advertising - there would need to be a reduction in ads for all obesity promoting foods in kids TV prime time...
And it certainly would be only one step amongst many - I agree with CES that the prime goal is to reduce the intake of fattening foods, and increase the level of exercise, which almost certainly means less TV & computer time, good eductation campaigns and some effort by parents. However, I think that reducing junk-food advertising directed at kids will help to achieve this goal. And yes, more research is needed, but you could combine such research with a trial reduction in a given city...
I like your tendency to see - and ability to articulate - the bigger picture. Good example, this post.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
Valden wrote:-Has given up fast food a couple months ago- I'm now the only one in my family who refuses anything like McDonalds.
I'm the only one in ours who (occasionally) eats it!
(once in a blue moon...)
I only go through the McDonalds drive thru for coffee and apple pie while on route to or from Germany. Sometimes I take a Tuna salad. I can't eat their burgers, I get hick-ups every time I do.
RuleBritannia wrote:People don't buy fast food because it's advertised on TV, they buy it 'cause it's fast and easy.
Actually, they do both. They do buy fattening junk food because it is fast and easy, and they do buy more of it because its availability is constantly brought to their attention. If the latter wasn't the case, there'd be no point in advertising, would there?
I can't agree, advertising for cigarettes has been banned for years yet virtually everyone can name at least one brand and most could name four, five or maybe six.
The reason the amount of smokers is going down is because of education into the health effects and banning of smoking in public places. Banning the adverts does nothing because everyone already knows that cigarettes exist, same goes for McDonalds.
Seraph wrote:As for the claim that junk food companies are only trying to steal market share from each other flies in the face of what capitalism is about.
Capitalism is when capital and the means of production are privately owned. Everything else is optional.
RuleBritannia wrote:People don't buy fast food because it's advertised on TV, they buy it 'cause it's fast and easy.
Actually, they do both. They do buy fattening junk food because it is fast and easy, and they do buy more of it because its availability is constantly brought to their attention. If the latter wasn't the case, there'd be no point in advertising, would there?
As for the claim that junk food companies are only trying to steal market share from each other flies in the face of what capitalism is about.
And in any case, no one here would be advocating a reduction or limitation on only McDonald's advertising - there would need to be a reduction in ads for all obesity promoting foods in kids TV prime time...
Well, the group cited in the OP is after Ronald McDonald in particular. I'm sure they would later go after "the King" for some reason too.
RuleBritannia wrote:People don't buy fast food because it's advertised on TV, they buy it 'cause it's fast and easy.
Actually, they do both. They do buy fattening junk food because it is fast and easy, and they do buy more of it because its availability is constantly brought to their attention. If the latter wasn't the case, there'd be no point in advertising, would there?
I can't agree, advertising for cigarettes has been banned for years yet virtually everyone can name at least one brand and most could name four, five or maybe six.
The reason the amount of smokers is going down is because of education into the health effects and banning of smoking in public places. Banning the adverts does nothing because everyone already knows that cigarettes exist, same goes for McDonalds.
Seraph wrote:As for the claim that junk food companies are only trying to steal market share from each other flies in the face of what capitalism is about.
Capitalism is when capital and the means of production are privately owned. Everything else is optional.
yah, fuck mcshit and ronald mcshit. Ban em both, Nice to see the "ban" votes are winning out slightly.
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.
sandinista wrote:yah, fuck mcshit and ronald mcshit. Ban em both, Nice to see the "ban" votes are winning out slightly.
This is how liberty dies....with thunderous applause....
Atheists have always argued that this world is all that we have, and that our duty is to one another to make the very most and best of it. ~Christopher Hitchens~
sandinista wrote:yah, fuck mcshit and ronald mcshit. Ban em both, Nice to see the "ban" votes are winning out slightly.
This is how liberty dies....with thunderous applause....
what are you on about? Liberty?
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.
