Fast Foods

Blackett

So advertising bans are spreading. What will this mean to print media. The death of advertising of junk food during childrens programmes has already sucked away funding of citv so that it has reduced its childrens programming down to 5hours a week, which leaves the BBC to rain supreme which is ok for now but the effects of this has the possiblility of making CBBC lazy and lothargic as there is no competition so no drive to make things better.

What could this mean for print media though. First of all it means the death of free sweets on magazines. The extnesion of the ban also means no more celebrity endorsement of products meaning crap toys in happy meals. And some childrens magazines/comics are bound to crash and burn on the 1st of July when this ban comes into effect. Hopefully this will mean children will eat more healthy, but I think it has the possibility of deamonising junk food the way that alcohol and smoking is therefor making it 'cool' and more children will eat it in secret.

A solution to the porblem of fat children will not only be found in advertising bans but in educating children and parents on what is healthy and even how to cook.

for more information on the on coming ban please click here.


Blakeborough

Well, what can you say really? Yet again the government has decided that we're not allowed to do something. I totally agree with Blackett about the demonising effect that this will have upon junk food; kids will eat these types of food in secret, and whereas that doesn't sound as bad as them smoking behind the bike sheds and sticking needles in their arms, anything that is done without the knowledge of their parents, particularly whilst they are young can only be bad in my book.
Now, I'm a great one for the phrase 'moderation', and although it does seem to be the watch word of beauticians, dieticians and any other kind of 'ician' around, I really do think that diet when considered properly and things enjoyed within reason is fine.
I personally always had sweets on the magazines I bought-or were bought for me- when I was teeny, as did the vast majority of people that I know, but I really cannot think of anyone I know that I would describe as having a serious health affecting weight problem. Again, I really agree with B, that parents have a responsibility to watch what their children are eating. Now, some people are going to argue that you can't watch what your child eats at school etc, and I am totally with you, but surely making junk food a 'forbidden fruit' is only going to make things worse.
I'm not a parent, but I'm assured by my own Mother that its hard enough trying to persuade children that drugs, drink and sex are bad things (at least until a proper age for the last two) but adding another thing that a parent has to worry about as a 'danger' just seems silly to me.


There are always going to be overweight people, but you cannot solve the current problem of mass obesity by a country-wide limitation on all things lardy. No. If people want to lose weight, because they feel unattractive, or they're unhealthy or for whatever reason, they will. Kids do not like fruit and vegetables as a rule, but if parents allow sweets and chocolate as a part of a otherwise balanced diet, then surely they must be setting a decent example? Banning things does not work. Especially from children. I know, I still am one.