War on Food: This Really Takes the (Snack)Cake

From MediaPost:

ACTIVIST GROUPS AND PARENTS SAID they intend to file suit against Viacom for ads on Nickelodeon promoting foods that are harmful to kids.

The suit, to be filed in a Massachusetts court, will also charge cereal giant Kellogg with marketing foods to children that are low on nutrients and high in sugar and health risks.

The plaintiffs want the court to block the companies from promoting the foods on platforms where children under the age of eight account for at least 15 percent of the audience, plus halt marketing via Web sites, toy giveaways, and other tactics.

Specifically targeted are Kellogg and Nickelodeon.

The suit could charge Viacom $25 each time a Massachusetts child views an ad for the foods in question on its Nickelodeon network, and Kellogg each time a child views an ad for one of its products in question on Nick or another network. The plaintiffs said, however, that marketing changes are the goal–not monetary damages.

I’ll believe this is a serious issue when I start reading about gangs of armed 8 year olds, incited by the latest Sponge Bob rerun, rioting and looting local convenience stores to get their fix of Apple Jacks and Pop-Tarts.

7 Comments
  1. Honestly, all of the reasons used to wage the war on drugs could easily be applied to unhealthy foods. I have to restrain myself from making the comparison sometimes because I don’t want to give anyone the idea.

    Who cares what children see on TV when its the parents that buy the food?

  2. When did parental responsibility fade into the sunset? One quote I read was something like: I try very hard to make my kids eat healthy foods, but then ads on [insert channel here] promoting [insert food item here] high sugar and completely devoid of nutrition comes on and I cave.

    Grow a spine. They’re your kids, you still have control over what you buy them at the store. Removing ads from TV and characters from boxes isn’t going to solve the problem of your kids wanting every sugary cereal in the supermarket.

  3. This is just phase one of the looting scheme. First they get the media to bash companies for addicting children which clears the way for politicians to offer junk food tax proposals. In the end we loose as shareholders and taxpayers – not to mention freedom.

  4. Who gets to decide what is healthy and what is not? The atkins crowd would push to eliminate bread. PETA would want to get rid of the meat. The vegan crowd would push the cheese out.

    In the end, only a majority approved food would make it onto the small screen. Democracy (in)action!

    yay for stupid taxachusetts. I gotta get out of here

  5. “Who gets to decide what is healthy and what is not? The atkins crowd would push to eliminate bread. PETA would want to get rid of the meat. The vegan crowd would push the cheese out.”

    What’s a matta, lettuce doesn’t do it for ya?!

  6. Rob D.

    What? Lettuce? Everyone knows that causes cancer. That’s the worst culprit of all. Lettuce should get triple fines

%d bloggers like this: