Archive for Persuasion Theory
Movember: If You Don’t Know, Google It
Posted by: | CommentsEach November, thousands of men around the world proudly sport mustaches in an attempt to raise awareness for men’s health issues such as prostate cancer. The movement, endearingly dubbed ‘Movember’, effectively creates “walking, talking billboards for the 30 days of November” (movember.com). In addition to calling attention to men’s health issues, the movement also raises funds through participating men that seek sponsorships for their mustaches. The money raised is funneled to several organizations such as the Prostate Cancer Foundation and LIVESTRONG. According to the website, in 2010 the movement raised an impressive $7.5mm.
This year, Movember efforts will likely be even more widespread thanks to an uplifting commercial from Google Chrome that depicts everything you can do when you use the Chrome browser to search for information on Movember.
Because the ad speaks to both Google Chrome and Movember it has benefits for both groups. Aside from the obvious benefit of increased exposure, the advertisement also serves both groups by using imagery to influence consumer decisions. With imagery, consumers “attempt to imagine themselves consuming the product or service and can use any emotions they experience as an input” for their decision (Hoyer MacInnis). The advertisement facilitates this by showing a mouse pointer using Google Chrome to navigate to all sorts of Movember-related sites. Viewers can easily relate to this because most people are intimately familiar with the act of navigating the web for information. People can readily see themselves as the person behind the pointer. Further, the images that result from the advertisement’s simulated search depict a wide variety of people engaging in all type of moustache-related activities. The vivid images are not only emotionally-stirring, they also make it easy for all types of consumers to imagine themselves taking part in the fun. The hope is that these pleasant and vivid images “will exert a positive…influence” on the consumer’s decision process (Hoyer MacInnis). This positive influence will result in the consumer feeling good both about using Google and taking part in the Movember movement.
The ad also plays on the consumer’s mood in order to positively influence the decision process. Research shows that consumers who are in a good mood are not only more willing to process information but also have a tendency to rate products more positively (Hoyer MacInnis). The enjoyable music, coupled with the rapid display of fun graphics and pictures in Google’s advertisement are designed to stimulate positive feelings. The consumer can’t help but feel good after watching it. This good mood will in turn influence the consumer to feel more positively towards both the Movember movement and Google Chrome.
The ultimate result of the ad is to stimulate positive feelings towards Google Chrome that will hopefully result in consumers keeping the product at the top of their consideration set when deciding which internet browser to use. The added benefit is that a worthy cause gets a vast amount of positive exposure. The uplifting depiction of the movement will hopefully inspire people and influence them to participate in the Movemeber movement.
Sources:
www.movember.com
Hoyer, Wayne D. and Deborah J. MacInnis (2008), Consumer Behavior, 5th edition, South-western Cengage Learning: Ohio.
Beer Institute Seeks to Ensure Ethical Alcohol Advertising
Posted by: | CommentsThe Better Business Bureau, the organization that presides over the Beer Institute, recently ruled that the Coors Light Bus Boy ad unintentionally violated the Beer Institute’s Advertising and Marketing Code. According to the code, “Beer advertising and marketing materials should not portray or imply illegal activity of any kind.” In the ad, there is a male that is constantly picking up Coors Light beers in a bar setting. After a while, a waitress notes that the “new bus boy” is doing a great job of cleaning off beers on the tables, to which the boss responds “I didn’t hire a bus boy”. While the underlying or intended meaning of the ad is that Coors Light is so good that people will go to crazy resorts to get it, an additional meaning that Coors Light is worth stealing is the reason for the criticism towards the ad.
While I wouldn’t have really taken such a literal meaning from the ad, I believe the rationale of the Beer Institute is understandable. While Coors itself doesn’t really believe that they have done wrong, they have agreed to stop running the ad as a result of the Better Business Bureau’s ruling. Alcohol advertising is a part of the overall institute of advertising that gets a lot of criticism for unethical advertising. I commend the Beer Institute for creating a non-legal but authoritative ethical standard in an attempt to change this reputation. If we as advertisers continue to create standards for ourselves and regulate ourselves, I believe we will be able to eventually gain credibility and positively impact people’s attitudes towards advertising while performing our business related roles.
I also believe that as advertisers we must look at our ads from several perspectives before we publish the work. While Coors intended to sell their product using a humorous story, there are ways to use humor without portraying or romanticizing illegal activities. If we could really scrutinize our work from an ethical point of view, we could avoid wasting time and money airing ads that won’t be approved our self-regulating structures. By taking time at the forefront to view the ethical impact of our advertising messages, I believe we can avoid a lot of time wasted and financial loss in the future.
FASHION AD BANNED BECAUSE OF TOO SKINNY MODEL
Posted by: | Comments
Britain’s AD standards authority just put the axe to a drop dead clothing ad,because of a complaint that the model was too skinny.Female models in advertisements are mostly young very thin, and very thin models create dissatisfaction with ones own body and appearance.Research shows that young women do compare themselves with models in ads and that such self comparisons can affect self esteem.Unfortunately,this value can be carried to extremes and can lead to eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia.As a result,consumers feel inadequate if they do not measure up to the comparison person.Consumers who feel threatened by such comparisons will lie about their behavior to protect their self esteem.AD with female models really have effects on people especially young people,so marketers should know the type of models to use for a particular product and marketers should not show ads that will make consumers dissatisfied with their appearance.
http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/another-fashion-ad-banned-because-too-skinny-model-136488
Barefoot Wine. Socially responsible advertising, One Beach at a time.
Posted by: | CommentsIn an effort to promote the importance of keeping our nation’s beaches clean and trash-free, Barefoot wine decided to do something a little unexpected when it comes to advertising.
They have long been a part of promoting beaches that are “barefoot” friendly and free of litter, and along with sponsoring the “One Beach” video about keeping our beaches trash-free, as well as their 2011 Beach Rescue Project, they have opted for a nontraditional ad: a 14×10 foot outdoor poster created entirely of 18,000 pieces of beach trash and mounted in the busy, touristy city of Venice Beach, California.
From their many beach rescue events, to their extensive promotion of doing your part, and their partnerships with Surfrider Foundation, they have found their niche in the world of social responsibility and are definitely trying to get people thinking about the effects of their actions.
As you can see, the outdoor advertisement stands out from any other ordinary poster or billboard and truly sets the agenda that littering, especially along our coastline, is not okay. Barefoot Wine realizes something needs to be done about this issue in order to turn the problem around and promote cleaner beach environments that are safer for wildlife and tourists alike.
The outdoor advertisement, which promotes their movie while also promoting their brand, influences individuals in a creative way by showing them just how dirty some of our nation’s beaches are. Barefoot Wine’s ad was created to draw people to the ad and capture attention, creating buzz about the topic along the way.
Although the advertisement definitely looks cool, most people who stumble upon this ad while at the beach will have a relatively low level of motivation to process its message. However, the fact that the ad stands apart from other traditional outdoor billboards and posters, takes the peripheral route when it comes to processing information. Consumers form positive attitudes about the advertisement’s message once they realize what the ad is made out of and true intent of the ad’s meaning. Those who are motivated enough by the ad’s message will actually take it a step further and watch the complete 30 minute “One Beach” video on YouTube, which details the extent of the issue.
It is pretty rare to see shock advertising done in a way that actually gets people thinking about a socially responsible topic, such as recycling and reducing waste, but the local California company definitely created an ad that is getting people talking. After commenting on Barefoot Wine’s facebook page, they even sent me a message with more information on the stories behind their One Beach film and campaign, which feature even more amazing details about the people in the video and the steps they are taking towards helping our environment and beaches than I had originally thought.
All in all, the interesting and socially responsible ad by Barefoot Wine really does a great job at persuading consumers of the need for a solution to this problem. Although they are indirectly promoting their wine brand, they are creating buzz about a topic that many people do care about, leading to positive emotions and feelings about the brand in the end. The fact that they truly do care about this initiative is very evident when looking not only at their advertisements, but also at their website and social media pages. The hope is that people passing this particular ad, while walking down the boardwalk, will form a positive attitude towards the brand’s message and advertisement, eventually increasing their liking towards the company as a whole.
Barefoot Wine: Beach Rescue Project
Barefoot Wine Dive Deeper: Stories Behind One Beach
Exclusion of Groups of Individuals….Socially Responsible?
Posted by: | CommentsThe advertising industry, as a whole, has a hard time gaining and maintaining a reputation of being socially responsible. One way to combat this issue is to make it a priority to go beyond what is asked of you in order to find a more responsible result. Is the inclusion of one group of consumers and the exclusion of another considered socially responsible, or is this issue simply up to the consumer to decide? The new Dr Pepper Ten campaign that recently rolled out serves as an excellent example of how this issue could be viewed from multiple perspectives.
Dr Pepper Ten, a reduced-calorie soda, has recently produced a national ad campaign specifically targeting men. This campaign does so bluntly, proudly, and unapologetically through the use of the tagline “Not for Women.” Dr Pepper Ten was developed after the Dr Pepper Snapple Group found that men desired a low calorie soda that was more manly appearing that that of current diet sodas. It was this finding which prompted them to target their advertising explicitly at the male population. However, the question still exists…is this considered socially responsible?
Not only to the print advertisements read “Not for Women,” but the commercials, as well as the Dr Pepper Ten facebook page unambiguously leave out women as well. The commercials depict muscled men running through the jungle in a combat-like setting, all the while saying, “Hey ladies, enjoying the film? Course not. Because this is out movie, and Dr Pepper Ten is our soda. It’s only ten manly calories, but with all 23 flavors of Dr. Pepper. It’s what guys want…so you can keep the romantic comedies and lady drinks, we’re good.” Their facebook page has a list of the “Ten Man’ments” describing the “definitive guide to social protocol for men.” Some of these include: “Thou shalt not OMG. If it’s not exploding, its not exciting,” and “Thou shalt not pucker up. Kissy faces are never manly.” This campaign will also include a mobile “Man Cave” that will travel across the major markets, as well as “testosterone zones” where men will be able to watch TV and play video games at sporting events and car shows. Did Dr Pepper need to go this far to target the male population? Does simply targeting men actually make it a “manly” drink?
Unfortunately, these are the types of advertisements that bring up the issue of what is actually considered socially responsible in the advertising industry. This ad campaign automatically raised the question of social responsibility in the industry from news outlets all over the place. These instances are the ones, which need to be kept in mind when determining the effectiveness of targeting certain groups of people in advertisements. Many of the advertisements like the one above would reach the same conclusion without excluding significant portions of the population. Consumer behavior and persuasion theories are all about providing the most relevant information to the most relevant groups of people, however this can be done just as easily in a more socially responsible way. It is important to keep in mind the personality characteristics of individuals when creating ad campaigns. Specifically, Dr Pepper must realize how gender and sexual orientation affect consumer behavior. It is increasingly difficult to simply advertise to just men, or just women as many men may exhibit feminine qualities as well as women exhibiting masculine qualities. With this being said, both men and women could ultimately take offense to this advertisement. Men may find it an overt stereotype, while many women may find it extremely sexist. Dave Fleming, Director of Marketing at Dr Pepper says that they are not out to alienate women, but isn’t that exactly what they are doing? With a company as popular as Dr Pepper, don’t you think they should make more of an effort to product more socially responsibly ad campaigns?
This advertisement is just one example of an issue that faces the advertising industry on an everyday basis. There are too many different types of individuals in our consumer culture today to simply exclude a group of consumers who have just as much buying power as those who are targeted. If this trend continues, the advertisements may start getting much more offensive than what we are seeing today. Is excluding a specific group of individuals socially responsible. It doesn’t seem so.
http://adage.com/article/news/dr-pepper-10-avoid-marketing-missteps-pepsi-coke/148983/
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2011/10/dr-pepper-ten-its-not-for-women-macho-marketing-campaign-says/
Then & Now
Posted by: | CommentsThe Advertisement is about different types of chevrolet cars used in the olden days and the lifestyle back then and the way some of the old chevrolet cars have been modernized to our millennium lifestyle.The ad is a patriotic ad and the song is also a patriotic song that brings memories and feelings to an American Citizen,so the brand also wants that kind of feelings and memories for their brand cause chevrolet is also an American Car.The Ad is an interesting Ad,because of the way cars have really improved from the past to our modern days and also the song of the Ad made me remember my kid days,most of my baby pictures was taken by my parents cars,anytime we are about to go out and i look good my Dad always takes pictures of me.
Music is frequently used as a communications tool by companies including General motors,sometimes the music Ads become popular and drive album sales.Music as a marketing device should not be surprising given that music has been shown to stimulate variety of positive effects.Music in Ads can stimulate emotional memories of experiences or situations,Music can also put the consumer in a positive mood and lead to the development of positive attitudes,it can be an effective conditioned stimulus for a classical conditioning strategy.Several Studies have also found that music can have a positive effect on purchase intentions.
Cause Advertising: Supporting the Cause, or Supporting the Profits?
Posted by: | CommentsWe’ve all heard of cause advertising, right? You know, like when you see a big name brand that has partnered with a non-profit organization. Well, this trend is nothing new, we’ve all seen it, believed it, been skeptical about it, or probably had every other thought possible about it.
Over the course of the cause advertising trend, consumers have begun to become cautious of these programs. For example, AdAge writer Scott Pansky discusses how KFC raised over four million dollars last year through its “Buckets for the Cure” campaign. However, both KFC and the nonprofit organization suffered from a lowered brand image, simply due to the fact that many consumers questioned the partnership. On one hand you’ve got greasy, fried, unhealthy chicken and when consumers purchase that KFC will donate to support breast cancer research, a fabulous cause that is finding a cure to support a healthy lifestyle… That seems a bit odd if you ask me. In this specific case, it led many consumers to question why KFC was doing this. Was it simply to use breast cancer research as a way to generate sales?
Since there have many questionable partnerships ultimately resulting in skepticism, it has caused many to say that cause-related marketing (cause advertising) is dead. But, is it really?
In a Cone Inc. study (2010), cited by the Nonprofit Brand Institute, it was found that 59% of Americans are more likely to buy a brand that is affiliated with a nonprofit organization. 50% are more willing to donate, 49% are more likely to participate in an event for that nonprofit and 41% are more likely to volunteer for that nonprofit. So, this obviously proves that cause-related marketing is not dead. In fact, it greatly benefits the brand as well as the nonprofit. So, what needs to be done to reach the consumers in an effective way so that they don’t question the partnership or become skeptical of it?
The big question is ‘”Can we build deeper relationships with our customers (retailers and end users) through a cause relationship and still increase sales?”’ The answer, yes—this trend can be extremely beneficial for advertisers, but only if the campaign is done correctly.
There are two things that advertisers need to focus on. First, the cause must be a good match for the company, brand, and target audience. It needs to be relevant. Second, there must be an alignment within the business. Leadership roles and other employees must all be on the same page and understand that the goal is not only to drive up sales numbers, but also to make a lasting impact with a meaningful organization.
Pansky sums it up pretty well, “The bottom-line message to the C suite is that creating effective, meaningful cause relationships is a long-term process that will help them create a brand legacy, not merely a quick sale. It’s about employee recruiting and retention, and creating the next generation of leadership that not only embraces the corporate culture but also helps to create a better tomorrow for consumers. Marketers need to embrace the idea that this is not a quick-fix marketing solution but a long-term commitment to a cause that is relevant to a long-term relationship with your customers. It’s not a date, it’s a marriage.”
Cause advertising campaigns are a great way to be socially responsible. It is wonderful that companies and brands want to help nonprofit organizations that benefit great causes. I think it is pretty obvious that if a company is partnering with a cause, they are on the right track towards being socially responsible. Companies aren’t just in it for themselves anymore—they are trying to make a difference in things that really matter.
So, we know that cause-related marketing is good, but why does it actually make an impact with consumers? What makes these campaigns so different from standard run-of-the-mill advertising campaigns?
Well, to start with, consumer’s values play a huge role. For example, let’s say that a consumer values the environment and wants to help preserve it; in this case, a cause advertising campaign for a certain brand of paper products benefiting The Nature Conservancy may hit home with this consumer and make them feel very strongly about that brand. This also ties into personal relevance. Going back to the KFC example, maybe a consumer knows someone that is fighting breast cancer, so they may be more likely to purchase a KFC meal rather than Popeye’s.
While the campaign needs to reach the consumer in a meaningful way, a brand that partners with a great cause is also improving their brand image. If a consumer already has positive feelings about the cause, those positive feelings may be transferred to positive feelings about the brand. This can also be demonstrated with attitudes. If a consumer has positive feelings towards a cause, when they view the advertisement that relates to that cause, they will probably have positive feelings towards the ad. When a consumer has positive feelings towards the ad, it impacts the attitude towards the brand.
If the campaign is successful, consumers will develop a positive attitude toward the brand, categorize the brand with other favorable products, and ultimately develop brand loyalty. While all of this is being done, the companies as well as the consumers are helping to make an impact by supporting great causes. It can definitely be argued that cause-related marketing is not only beneficial, but also socially responsible.
With that, I will leave you with the new Coca-Cola holiday campaign developed by Leo Burnett.
(You must have known that it would be cause advertising, right!)
Working with the WWF and the new “To The Arctic 3D” IMAX, Coke will be “whiting out” it’s billboards and soda cans to benefit this great cause.
Articles Used:
http://adage.com/article/goodworks/marketers-core-consumers-demand/230061/
http://npbrandit.com/articles/nonprofit-marketing/study-shows-nonprofits-benefit-from-corporate-partnerships/
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/coca-cola-real-polar-bears-wwf-promo/230632/
Car Companies Addressing Socially Responsible Driving-Related Issues
Posted by: | CommentsDriving is a privilege and a responsibility. While driving is convenient in getting us from point A to B, society also entrusts the driver with the faith that they won’t harm themselves or others with their activity. I found it interesting that two different car companies, Ford and Kia, ran print ad campaigns this fall to address issues concerning responsible driving. Kia partnered with MADD in an campaign to discourage drinking and driving while Ford’s campaign focuses on the epidemic of social networking and phone use while driving.
In the Kia ad, created by Innocean Worldwide in Canada, attention is gained by the surprise element. We all know the typical, don’t drink and drive message, but it is presented in a novel and unexpected way by displaying them as tattoos on the person’s body. Furthermore, they use tattoos to drive home the fact that the consequences of drinking and driving are permanent. I also found it interesting that they used both genders in the ad campaign as well as different ages. Since drunk driving is something that happens with both genders and across different ages, I believe it was important to represent that. Also, I believe this ad gains attention by being easy to process. Once you read the inscription on the tattoos, it is easy to “get” the message that the ad is trying to tell us. Using the dark background, the objects you are supposed to focus on are clear and the understanding you are supposed to gain from it are concrete. While this message is one you typically expect from MADD, it is not a message you would expect from Kia. I believe by cosigning to this ad, they hope to transfer positive feelings about MADD and their cause towards Kia through brand partnership. For those who believe in purchasing from “socially responsible” businesses, this type of advertising activity might sway them to further consider Kia in the consumer decision process.
The Ford campaign, created by Agency MJ in Brazil, is not as serious but still addresses a serious topic. By using the images one associates with social networking, they show how phone usage can distract one from being entirely cognizant of the environment they are driving in. They chose to make the ad stimulating by using novelty to illustrate their message. They also heightened the possibility of safety risk to drive their point across to the audience. I think this kind of ad message would cause positive feelings with parents and older consumers that are highly concerned with the driving habits of the younger, social networking drivers. In these ads, it seems like Ford is simply saying “we care what you care about” and again, might appeal to consumers that are passionate about this cause or social responsible businesses.
In both ad campaigns, it is reassuring to see car companies recognizing problems involved with the consumption of their product. By highlighting these issues, Ford and Kia are positioning themselves as “socially responsible” companies that deserve your consideration in your next car. After all, if they care about society as a whole, of course they would care for their consumers right? Ads like these, even if they are still driven by economic motives, will continue to increase public regard for advertising as an institution.
Chipotle is Going Back to the Start: Marketing with Integrity
Posted by: | CommentsIn a day and age where fast food is made up of ingredients many of us are oblivious to, it is refreshing to see a company stand out from the rest and base their entire marketing mantra on a concept unfamiliar to many people in this fast paced, “I want it now” society we live in. The idea of “Going Back to the Start” is the face of Chipotle’s new viral marketing campaign aimed at informing consumers that there is such a thing as “food with integrity,” which is simply natural, family-grown or raised, and ultimately socially responsible.
An article by the Chicago Tribune discusses Chipotle’s recently released video featuring Willie Nelson’s rendition of Coldplay’s popular song, “The Scientist,” which depicts a small town farmer shifting away from his traditional farming roots and adopting an industrialized and unnatural method of cultivating his livestock. Eventually, the farmer realizes his original way of farming was far superior and decides to do the environmentally responsibly thing and “go back to the start.” Chipotle does an excellent job in getting people to think about the serious issue, while promoting its brand in the meantime.
The advertisement, which is intended to create somewhat of an emotional reaction to people viewing the harmful effects that industrialized farming brings with it, creates a sense of sadness and empathy for the farmer. It really gets people thinking about the differences between Chipotle as a fast food chain, as opposed to say, your typical McDonalds ad.
Sustainable farming, which Chipotle bases their entire positioning off of, “uses techniques such as crop rotation, soil conservation, natural fertilization and polyculture planting. In livestock production, they use pasture-based systems, feed animals what their bodies are designed to digest, and treat their animals humanely. Sustainable farms produce foods that are tastier and more nutritious than foods produced on factory farms, while also preserving the long-term health of our environment.”
Simply said, this is responsibility at its finest, despite the negative stereotypes that many fast food restaurants must battle. Chipotle seizes that opportunity in the marketplace to finally provide a fast food experience that defies the typical processed and unnatural methods of creating food and opts for an experience that provides healthy, fresh, locally grown, and socially responsible options. By raising awareness about what responsible farming is, they are fostering a need for healthy and naturally raised food that many people were unaware they had.
As many people are trying to do their part in going green and helping the environment in any little way, Chipotle has made the responsible choice. The powerful “Going Back to the Start” video sets the agenda that people should be concerned about where their food comes from originally. But, while many people may view this as just a healthy food option, when going to the roots of what Chipotle is really doing, they are keeping small family farmers in business and helping the economy along the way.
Many people may think, however, why haven’t I seen these advertisements? Chipotle is again set apart from the rest, they choose not to engage in heavy television or radio advertising, but instead to stick to simple movie-theater ad placements, word of mouth, and public event sponsoring to raise awareness of their brand’s positioning as an environmentally responsible company. These ads create a positive impact on those who view them, while informing and motivating consumers to learn more. Chipotle also discusses their farming methods and responsibility in using sustainable farming techniques all over their website in order to raise awareness about the importance of such a trend.
This popular concept of going-green, being environmentally responsible, and incorporating organically grown food helps Chipotle to solidify their standing as a company that truly cares about the implications of their actions. Their growing popularity and extreme success in the business world teaches other companies in the fast food industry that caring about the long-term effects of your business’ actions will carry with it many positive benefits.
In the case of Chipotle, this is truly marketing with integrity.
Chicago Tribune Original Article
Chipotle’s Webpage: Food With Integrity
Sustainable Table: The Daunting Techniques of Factory Farming
Controversy Over Proposed Food Marketing Guidelines
Posted by: | Comments
Ad Week recently reported that in response to pressure the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children is considering making changes to their proposed voluntary guidelines for food marketers targeting children. The controversy over the regulation is indicative of our increasing concern as a society over both childhood obesity and the effect advertising might have on that problem. In a nutshell, the plan proposed that marketers either change the formulation of certain products aimed at children to make the foods more healthy or cease marketing those products to children. While the proposal has a number of Senate Democrat supporters, it has generated strong criticism for being too heavy-handed (despite being completely voluntary) from both the advertising industry and GOP congressmen. While the goal of reducing childhood obesity is laudable, those in favor of increased regulation of advertising need to realize that, in this case, regulation of advertising may not achieve the desired effect.
At first glance it may seem like regulation is the way to go. While children aren’t making most of the final purchase decisions, they do play a strong role in influencing their parents’ decisions which is part of the rationale for marketing to children. Yet because children aren’t fully developed mentally, they may be more prone to impulsive behavior and less capable of making rational decisions, making them more likely to be misled by advertising. As childhood obesity is now widely recognized as a major social problem it therefore might seem like a no-brainer to push the kind of regulation the Interagency Working Group is proposing.
However in this case regulating marketing efforts may not be the best way to go about achieving the ultimate goal of promoting healthy eating during childhood. Faced with the prospect of the stick rather than the carrot, advertisers may simply find ways around the regulation while technically remaining in compliance. In fact this might already be happening to some extent. An earlier piece by Ad Week mentions a report by the Rudd Center noting that while advertisements for junk-food aimed at children are down, children’s exposure to junk-food product placement is up.
For their part, advertisers need to realize that concern over childhood obesity and worries that marketing efforts are exacerbating the problem aren’t going away. Rather than continually taking defensive action against this kind of regulation they need to consider the benefits of developing and advertising healthy products that kids actually like. Easier said than done, but considering the influence children have on family purchases how much easier would it be to increase sales if the foods they wanted didn’t cause parents concern?
Ad Week: Feds May Soften Controversial Food Marketing Guidelines
Ad Week: Study: Industry’s Found Sneaky Way to Keep Advertising Junk Food to Kids
Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children’s Guidelines
