Taking The Toy out of the Happy Meal?

Peggy - posted on 02/15/2011

"Fast food is not a health risk, nor is it linked to obesity, people don't die of obesity related problems", I do believe we have all agreed that FF is unhealthy to eat.. if you are eating it AND unhealthy foods at home day in and day out and you are not getting the exercise to burn the outrages calories, YES it will put weight on you!... hell, even the "not educated" person can figure that one out!!

"Today, corporations spend more than $15bn every year on marketing, advertising and promotions meant to program American children to consume, consume and consume some more"... oh NO they used the word "advertising" ... thought that was a BIG NO NO that we all were getting "harped at" for using it.

And I am still waiting for an answer to "Do you really believe that these kids that are getting fed FF all the time that they are not getting fed crappy junk foods at home". So to ban marketing, advertising or whatever word you want to use toward children will NOT stop the parents of feeding their children crap and being the MAIN reason their children are over weight to begin with. If they are being "sucked" in because of the toy.. buy it and be done with it.. but they will still go home and fix corn dogs and french fries, hot dogs and chips, cookies for a snack and so on.

Kylie - posted on 02/14/2011

lol!

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

Lmao! Libratarian?? No. And that has nothing to do with the topic at hand,this is not a political debate. And let me guess,Laura your a republican?

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

Actually,Laura I didn't state that fast food doesent create obesity,or that it leads to deaths in some people,I didnt say any of that in my statements,I just pointed out that it wasn't the only factor in obesity and deaths...

Jodi - posted on 02/14/2011

LOL Laura, hubby and I were just discussing the Pavlov experiment the other night in relation to child discipline (don't ask how we got onto the topic, probably something to do with the way I manipulated my daughter into doing something :D)

Stifler's - posted on 02/14/2011

Shana... please review the thread. Or at least skim some of the posts.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

*sigh...it's not just a toy. It's a marketing tool, and a very successful one at that which rewires a child's brain...but a happy night to you.

Shana - posted on 02/14/2011

Its just a toy!! Lets start at home to make better decisions for how our children eat, live and make choices instead of blaming society. I cant take it when parents blame others for not teaching or standing up to their kids. If I don't want my son to have mcdonalds a simple no will do. I will not blame mcdonalds for my son wanting a toy in a happy meal..Im his parent not mcdonalds or any commercial, marketing firm.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

OK, you guys have probably heard of Pavlov, but I'm gonna throw him out there anyways.

There was a scientist who once said "I bet I could make animals WANT food even when they are not hungry" Everybody in the scientific community said "you're crazy...animals don't eat if they're not hungry".

So he started an experiment where he measured the signs that his animals were getting hungry and the most reliable sign of hunger was salivation rates...when animals were hungry, they salivated.

So he started ringing a bell before he fed the dogs...he did this for a long time. Eventually, he rang the bell after feeding the dogs and produced no food...the salivation rate was the same as if it were dinner time.

The way this translates to Consumer psychology is that humans, as it turns out, are the same...you can PRODUCE the need for them to consume. Either through scents, hyper-oxygenation of environments, lighting, giving a 'reward' for consuming in the past...fuels the NEED for humans to "consume" ...as it turns out, by the way, the urge to consume is the same as the need to eat (psychologically).

We are all animals...and people have the keys to make us do what they want us to do...I actually WISH that it stopped at fast food... cause it doesn't.

They know how to make people willing to steal, kill, whatever...and if it comes to that point...ask yourself if you are any different from the millions of German citizens that were saluting and hailing Hitler. Because I assure you...you are not.

Teresa - posted on 02/14/2011

No, I get that. Sorry. I don't know why I'm debating for the stupid toy anymore. I shouldn't try and type while hungry.....

Teresa - posted on 02/14/2011

I've never heard of those. I think they'd be cute to have actually, but my kids never got any bottles.

Jenny - posted on 02/14/2011

Teresa, you're missing the point. It's about harm reduction, not harm elimination.

You can't take away choice but you can take away outside influence on that choice.

Jenny - posted on 02/14/2011

How about this, is this ok with you guys?

Nor is it just their current expenditure that corporations want a slice of: they're looking at the long term. Brand logos for all sorts of crap now turn up on nursery blankets, crib toys and mobiles. In my office, I have a collection of baby bottles shaped like little bottles of 7 Up, DR Pepper and Pepsi. I found them on eBay. When we contacted the California manufacturer, Munchkin Bottling, they told us they had produced these things for a few years in the mid-1990s. They'd developed the concept themselves, then licensed the various drinks companies' names and logos. Think about the associations formed in infants' minds by these things. Think about the mentality that sees nothing wrong in marketing them.

Teresa - posted on 02/14/2011

Marketing to children isn't failing...... Yes, SOME parents will stop buying, but I guarantee there will still be parents that buy their kid crap food every day w/out any marketing.... how are you going to save them?

I just don't agree w/ getting rid of the toy.... obviously. I don't disagree that it will do SOME good, but unless you outright ban ALL fast food.... some kids are still going to die and since you are concerned about the kids who's parents buy crap food all the time..... it's the ones that will still buy the food w/out the toy that you should spend 27 pages debating about. Not the ones that will stop buying the crap food w/out the toy in it. ;)

Jenny - posted on 02/14/2011

Teresa, it's not to reach the parents, it's to reach the kids. The toy is not in the meal for Mom and Dad.



It's an effort to curtail it in the younger generation before they too are taking their kids to FF places regularly.



Their marketing plan is "cradle to the grave". Check out this editorial http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0522...



Excerpt:

McDonald's and the other fast-food chains make no secret of the fact that kids are their primary targets. "We have living proof of the long-lasting quality of early brand loyalties in the cradle-to-grave marketing at McDonald's, and how well it works," James McNeal, a well-known children's marketing guru and the author of Kids As Customers, has said. "We start taking children in for their first and second birthdays, and on and on, and eventually they have a great deal of preference for that brand. Children can carry that with them through a lifetime."



Today, corporations spend more than $15bn every year on marketing, advertising and promotions meant to program American children to consume, consume and consume some more. Why? Because they realize that children not only have more expendable income of their own, but they influence how their parents spend their hard-earned bucks, too - to the tune of more than $600bn a year. What do children choose to buy with all that cash? What do you think?

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

HEY WAIT! I may soon qualify for an AWESOME job at McD's...maybe I"LL tell them that marketing to children is failing and they're wasting their money...do you think they'll believe me???



I'll have to fudge some SERIOUS numbers though...and that would be wrong...right?

Jodi - posted on 02/14/2011

I don't think the toy should be banned, I think someone should just tell McDOnalds it isn't working, and they will volunteer to withdraw it, because there is no point in them spending the money on including the toy in the Happy Meal if it makes no difference anyway :P

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

I never said that banning the stupid toy would be THE solution...I said it was a PART of the larger solution of banning ALL marketing of unhealthy things directly to children.

Teresa - posted on 02/14/2011

I see the correlation, but I just don't agree that banning the stupid toy is a logical solution. IF the fast food and lead paint are the same connection..... the 'solution' is banning fast food.... not the toy. Yes, I know.... now comes the part where the marketing is making the kid beg for the toy which makes the parent buy the food, but..... the parents of the kids you are trying to save will STILL buy the crap food w/ or w/out the toy.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

The reason I asked you about lead paint and car seats is because I was beginning to think you were just a libertarian...and while I disagree with libertarians, I understand the underlying fundamentals of their beliefs...NO regulations, anywhere for anyone, for any reason...but YOU just pick and choose which ones YOU think are worthy, so...it's simply bias as opposed to a political and economic philosophy.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

because it is EXACTLY the same thing...I could post info for days...it appears you are one of the last 3 people on earth who does not believe that regularly eating fast food creates obesity, complications due to obesity kill people, marketing works, and that corporations NEED to be regulated.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

How is it Bias?

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

and there's no debating blind bias

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

If you see the connection and STILL disagree with me, it COULD be argued that you are simply biased either FOR the corporation or AGAINST a specific demographic.

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

no,not at all. I can see a connection I.E. correlation of the two but it doesent mean I agree with you...cause I really dont,and Im not going to and ive argued that already.

Charlie - posted on 02/14/2011

I agree Laura ....

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

if you see a connection...then it must be there

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

No,I see the connection,I just dont agree with you,thats all.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

to be honest, if you can't understand the connection between why children deserve to be protected from parents who are too stupid and lazy NOT to buy lead painted toys or use a car seat and protecting children from parents who are too stupid and lazy NOT to feed their child crap everyday because they are manipulated into it...there really isn't much point...is there?

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

"as a responsible parent you should know who has a shitty parent...and not send your kid there"

This not a controlled factor though Laura,when it comes to parents being responsible and knowing whats right from wrong.

Chatty - posted on 02/14/2011

LMFAO! Okay!

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

Dana,I was asking what your point was and what you hope to accomplish because its irrelevant to the topic of discussion, and since this is "Debating Mums" and not "Lets Be a smart ass" Forum,lets stay on topic okay? okay. :)

Chatty - posted on 02/14/2011

Since you know how to spot sarcasm, you should be able to figure it out! :)

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

That wasnt meant for you Dana,It was for Laura :)
Meh,and your point is?
what do you hope to accomplish with that statement?

Chatty - posted on 02/14/2011

"P.S. Sarcasm is very easy to spot for me and I know how sarcastic your last post is."

Nothing gets past you! ;)

Teresa - posted on 02/14/2011

Yeah, ok.... banning a stupid piece of crap toy is EXACTLY the same thing.... enjoy another 26 pages of this debate.......

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

as a responsible parent you should know who has a shitty parent...and not send your kid there

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

so...

Teresa - posted on 02/14/2011

Laura.... your kid would suffer if his/her friends parents bought lead paint toys and your kid played w/ it..... or if the school/church/playgroup place did..... all w/out your knowledge or approval and there would be nothing you could do about it cuz you wouldn't KNOW......

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

Because Lead is absolutley dangerous for children and no lead should be involved in a child's toy...And Ofcourse we educate ourselves thats why we dont buy harmful things...I have no worries either. Trust me. MY child will learn right from wrong and not to be stupid,Like most parents are...Isnt it sad?! We can teach our children right from wrong but as parents cant even teach ourselves right from wrong.

When its law to have a car seat in your vehichle,you are forced to do it and its the safest for your child if you dont want to adhere to law then you suffer consequences,and thats all you! :)

P.S. Sarcasm is very easy to spot for me and I know how sarcastic your last post is.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

WHY should lead painted toys be illegal???is it not our job as parents to research what we are buying, is it not our job to be smart enough to know which companies are using lead and therefore make the appropriate purchase decision? I have no worries...MY kids wouldn't suffer, because I wouldn't buy lead painted toys. AND I'm strong enough to say no when they cry and beg for them ;P



and it should also be a parent's responsibility to make sure their child is safe in the car...nobody should be able to FORCE a parent to strap their child into what may be a death trap for all they know. My grandmother carried my mother in the car and my mother carried me...I KNOW that is the right way to do things and nobody should have the right to force me to do otherwise.

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

Thats about it,laura.
You hit it right on the nose.
Cause if we want and choose to be consumers then we need to be responsible.

And no Lead painted toys should NOT be legal and car Seats are mandatory.

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

ahahahahaha!!! I got 500!

Jenny - posted on 02/14/2011

Dammit Laura!

Jenny - posted on 02/14/2011

I also have a University education with a good chunk in marketing.

Oh and #500, I win!

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

I would like to make sure I have your (plural) argument straight.



There should be no laws that impede businesses by forcing them to behave fairly, ethically, and honestly.



It is entirely the responsibility of the customer to do all the research and know when they are being tricked or swindled and whether or not the product they are buying is truly safe.



And if I start a campaign teaching kids how to electrocute themselves with toasters, I hold no responsibility when hundreds of thousands of children end up braindamaged or dead from being electrified, because their parents should have been watching them closer.



Fast food is not a health risk, nor is it linked to obesity, people don't die of obesity related problems, marketing doesn't work anyways.



Is that about it?



PS...should lead painted toys be legal, and car seats optional?

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

lead painted toys??? still waiting...

Jodi - posted on 02/14/2011

I have another one for you all that KIND OF addresses a similar issue, I'll be interested in opinions. However, I haven't got time to post it for now - organising kids for school :P

Angela - posted on 02/14/2011

It surely Is. :D

Isobel - posted on 02/14/2011

I would say that a third year, A+ student of the topic has slightly more info...THAT is my opinion