Tim Hortons and McDonald's, which both sponsor kids sports teams across the country, still do plenty of radio ads, plus almost every station out there works McHappy Day and Camp Day, because corporate expects it. The proposed ban should have included the sports team sponsorships, because said sponsorships just reinforce Tim's and McD's (and their junk food) as top-of-mind with our children.

Kids in the 60s, 70s and 80s were far less overweight, much more active, generally physically and mentally healthier, and grew up wolfing down Frosted Flakes, Lucky Charms and Captain Crunch.  Ads have nothing to do with it.

WUTV29 used to run ads for The Sundowner during my after-school cartoon block of G.I. Joe and The Transformers.

Which is more detrimental?

Last edited by Binson Echorec (January 19, 2024 12:59 pm)

I can't understand this thinking.
Most of the ads in question would be aimed at young kids still dependent on their parents.
Frosted flakes and Count Chocula are not generally not aimed at teens or young adults.
When a kid wants that stuff they have to ask their parents.
Can't they just say, "no" or am I being naive?

 

BowmanvilleBob wrote:

Sigh...once again, another of the "I don't want to get political....but" posts, based on dog whistling from a bunch of right-wing media outlets with little or no context provided.

There have long been restrictions placed on advertising directed specifically at children and they have been put in place after consultations with the ad industry, largely to prevent the sort of "hey kids, hold your breath until your parents buy you..." kind of ads that were prevalent in the 70s/80s. As recently as last year, a [url=https://cassels.com/insights/a-bite-sized-update-on-the-new-restrictions-on-advertising-food-to-children/#:~:text=As%20set%20out%20above%2C%20Health,place%20between%202016%20and%202019.]new round of regulations[/url] were announced, in addition to the rules already put in place by the Ad Council of Canada. 

As always, the key issue is whether the ads are specifically targeted at children, which is based on both the content and whether they're being broadcast on channels and at times when kids make up the largest share of the audience. We've all seen this ad featuring Tony the Tiger, but with no kids in the cast and the fact that it's been broadcast in prime time and on numerous specialty channels, it's debatable as to whether it would be affected by these proposed regulatory changes. 

Frankly, this kind of partisan misinformation serves no one.

I was going to say something similar.
Thank you!