Comments on: Kellogg Won't Market Sugary Cereal To Kids

Cereal/Snack-Maker Agrees To Stop Advertising Too-Sugary Products To Children

Add a Comment See all 49 Comments
by brianbwb-2009 June 15, 2007 5:58 AM EDT
While it is true that Americans simply eat too much, and too much that is not healthy or nutritious, also consider this, when the sponsors pull their dollars from children's programming, including the beneficial and educational kind, then such programming will simply disappear.

To all who complain about the quality of TV, how do you propose to raise the standards of television, if the capital for production is cut?

Some of the "golden age of television" programs of the late fifties and early sixties, including news, was sponsored by cigarettes, some of sport's truly historic moments were captured for posterity by cameras sponsored by beer.

Jazz festivals, which were important to the development of a truly American music form, and the epitome of cultural cooperation, were sponsored by Kool, Newport, even Playboy magazine.

Now most jazz is history, as its' traditional sponsors were forbidden to display, the festivals, clubs and other events where artists could make a living simply went extinct, so now you have such as Mariah Carey and Justin Timberlake as the standard of musical excellence...
Reply to this comment
by moxichick June 15, 2007 5:57 AM EDT
OK, here is my happy medium. My husband & I work F/T outside the home to make ends meet. Our son does NOT watch TV and reads books! Gasp! He eats a hot breakfast every morning, gets a packed lunch & a healthy dinner w/ green vegetables. Now, here is the kicker! We allow him 'junk cereal' as a dessert. Instead of ice cream or a chocolate bar he is allowed to eat a small bowl of junk cereal (T-Tiger, Cookie Crisp, etc.) w/ low fat organic milk. This way he gets to enjoy (on occasion) what his friends are eating for breakfast. I've shared this secret w/ many parents and they love it. The box lasts us about 3 weeks in an air tight container.
Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 June 15, 2007 4:37 AM EDT
bellaL

"That's not the norm anymore."

You've got that right!

You have some parents who are tired when they get home from work and just can't deal with all their other responsibilities. Then you have parents that are just plain and simply LAZY.
Sometimes both parents don't need to work but they are greedy and having MORE money is more important than staying home and raising their own kids, instead of a babysitter doing it.

I am trying to understand why these people have children. No one should have children unless they are going to live up to their responsibilities with raising them. That means it don't matter whether they are tired or not, they chose to have kids, so they need to get off their a-s-ses and start looking after them.
Reply to this comment
by bellal-2009 June 15, 2007 3:47 AM EDT
Well let's just say it like it is. Parents have been dumbed down along with everything else in society. We used to have basic norms for politeness and obscenity, no longer true. We used to have stay at home moms who cooked for their family. We used to have an economy based oneone income. Parents used to make kids eat right, go to bed early on school nights, not swear, be polite, do their homework, etc. That's not the norm anymore.
Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 June 15, 2007 3:39 AM EDT
d_goddard

"Presumably, they feel that people should not be allowed to freely make their own choices and to accept the consequences (good or bad) of those actions."

"If you feel you should be able to live your life however you want, so long as you are not directly harming someone else..."

The problem is that it is the parents making the choices to buy these things for children. Children don't know any better. There are so many parents out there that have no backbone when it comes to saying NO to their kids. AND the kids are the ones paying for it. It is one thing if you want the freedom to choose bad foods for yourself but another that you choose them for your children just because they are crying that they want something and you can't say no. If you are choosing these kinds of things for your kids, you ARE "directly harming" them. It is up to the parents to make good choices for their children until they are old enough to know the consequences of eating that kind of food, themselves.

With so much childhood obesity, parents need to wake up.
Reply to this comment
by dmk3 June 15, 2007 2:12 AM EDT
Actually, there was mention of reformulating some of the cereals.(Iread the article).If redirecting the marketing is not an option. So.....marketing to kids 6 and up. Oh yeah, they won't become obese. And to compare them GM, what a hoot. Lucky Charms may be whole grain once you remove the pink hearts, yelllow moons, orange stars, green clovers, and blue diamonds! Give me a freakin break. Let the people do what they want to do. Discipline starts at home. Surely you can take your children to the store at any hour and not be 'tantrumed' into buying what they want. Again, I say....BE THE PARENT
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 June 14, 2007 11:56 PM EDT
I am 52. I was brought up when NO was said it meant NO.There foods banned. No pop,candy,cake,sweets. My foster Mums had diabetes. We had birthday cake on our birthdays. Once in a great while a dish of ice cream. She banned them for our health. Sorrt here but fat children are made fun of,can't find clothes to fit them, and the like. It is child abuse. We didn't watct TV much growing up. We never heard of computer. We were sent outdoors to play. Play we did. Now the schools and parents are too lazy to have children play and Phy Ed is taken out of school. So it is our business as we pay taxes to the schools. Cut the junk out.It is pure sugar. If parents did then all the better. Kids may whine but you have the power to mean No.
Reply to this comment
by imaok1 June 14, 2007 9:59 PM EDT
"No, I have not lost my mind and yes I did read the article. I am 50 years old and when I was a child, cereal commercials and toy commercials and candy commercials and snack commercials were marketed to children. Buy, back then, parents were parents. So who has lost their mind? The person that can't control their own lives they need "protection" from the "powers that be" You're the fool."

So let's see... at 50, it's reasonable to say you were really the first generation of children heavily marketed to by corporations to eat cheap, sugary junk food that made big profits for them. Your generation grew up, and continued to purchase this food for yoru children, who are now part of the larges group of obese adolesants and children our nation has ever seen. Yeah, you're right, marketing has no effect on kids, and your generation has it all worked out just fine with "how things were." hahahahahaha
Reply to this comment
by lilacs8 June 14, 2007 9:52 PM EDT
It's the parents who buy the cereal, let their kids sit all day in front of game consoles, computers and T.V.s. They send their kids to schools who eliminate Phys Ed. Yet they blame a cereal company for their kids being fat?

When will people start taking responsibility for their own actions?
Reply to this comment
by simpsonman19 June 14, 2007 7:56 PM EDT
I agree, its not the 10 year old kid driving to the store buying the cereal, it's the parents.
Reply to this comment
See all 49 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror. Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: