|
|
NavigationTopicsUser login |
childrenStudy Says Teen Virginity Pledges Are a BustTopics: children | education | U.S. government
Federally-funded TV ad promoting abstinence-only sex education. Under the Bush administration, the federal government has put over $176 million into funding abstinence-only sex education programs, a component of which is asking teenagers to take a pledge that they will remain virgins until after marriage. But a recent analysis of data from a large federal survey revealed that over half of youths became sexually active whether or not they took the pledge. The study also found that teens who took the pledge tended to have more negative views of condoms and to use them less. The percentage of teens who did have sex and took precautions against sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy was 10 points lower for pledgers than for non-pledgers. "This study again raises the issue of why the federal government is continuing to invest in abstinence-only programs," said Sarah Brown of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. Motrin Ad Makes Moms MadTopics: advertising | children | women
It's never good to get your target demographic really mad at you. Johnson & Johnson managed to do exactly that with a recent on-line commercial for its Motrin pain reliever. In the ad, a "mom" talks about how much carrying her baby around is hurting her neck, shoulders and back. It starts with "Wearing your baby seems to be in fashion. I mean in theory, it's a great idea ... " But then the voice over says she cries more than moms that don't carry their baby around "hands free." It's worth it though, because when people see her with her little bundle of pain, she says,"it totally makes me look like an official mom." The reaction from parenting groups was quick, and the ad was pulled just days after launch. Because of long lead times for print publications, however, it will be around to haunt Motrin for a while. Hold the Advertising?Topics: advertising | children | obesity
A TV ad featuring the "Burger King Kids Club." "A ban on fast-food advertising to children would cut the national obesity rate by as much as 18%, according to a new study conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research and funded by the National Institutes of Health," reports Emily Bryson York. The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a front group for the restaurant and fast-food industry, has responded by calling the study "erroneous" because one of the study's authors acknowledges that "a lot of people consume fast food in moderate amounts and it doesn't harm their health" (as though this observation contradicts the study's findings in any way whatsoever). Previous studies have reached similar conclusions (and have likewise been attacked by CCF). It's Not Rocket ScienceTopics: children | health | science | U.S. government
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is poised to end "a six-year-old battle between career EPA scientists" who want to regulate a chemical linked to thyroid problems in pregnant women and children, and the White House and Pentagon, where officials oppose setting a drinking-water safety standard for the chemical, perchlorate. Guess who's likely to win? The EPA's "preliminary regulatory determination," obtained by the Washington Post, claims that setting a perchlorate drinking-water standard wouldn't result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public water systems." The document was heavily edited by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Among the OMB's comments was "that there was 'no need'" to include "detailed data" that showed that "infants would be exposed to perchlorate levels above" levels deemed safe by the National Academy of Sciences. Perchlorate is present in rocket fuel; many contaminated water sources are near military bases. In an attempt to avoid costly clean-ups, defense companies formed the Perchlorate Study Group, which has questioned whether perchlorate in drinking water poses a health problem. Stealth Marketers Gone Wild: Will the FCC Act?Submitted by Diane Farsetta on Tue, 09/23/2008 - 14:21.
Topics: children | Fake TV News | journalism | marketing | public relations | U.S. government One of my favorite critiques of our ad-saturated modern world is in "Infinite Jest," the epic novel by recently-departed author and essayist David Foster Wallace. In the novel's not-too-distant future, time itself has become a corporate marketing opportunity. There's the Year of the Trial-Size Dove Bar and the Year of the Depend Adult Undergarment. That's not to mention the Year of the Yushityu 2007 Mimetic-Resolution-Cartridge-View-Motherboard-Easy-To-Install-Upgrade For Infernatron/InterLace TP Systems For Home, Office, Or Mobile, which is often abbreviated.
The Center for Media and Democracy believes that all advertising should be as clearly announced as the Year of the Trial-Size Dove Bar. That's why we just filed a comment with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC is debating how its sponsorship identification rules apply to product placement, product integration and other types of "embedded advertising" relayed over television or radio stations. In 2003, Commercial Alert urged the FCC to address product placement disclosure. "Advertisers can puff and tout, and use all the many tricks of their trade," the watchdog group wrote (pdf). "But they must not pretend that their ads are something else." Especially, we would add, when that "something else" is news programming. The Gardasil HPV Vaccine: Not the Shot in the Arm Merck Hoped forSubmitted by Judith Siers-Poisson on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 07:12.
Topics: children | health | pharmaceuticals | women
Absolving Your Sins and CYA: Corporations Embrace Voluntary Codes of ConductSubmitted by Anne Landman on Thu, 09/04/2008 - 13:08.
Topics: children | corporate social responsibility | public relations | tobacco
When a company adopts and prominently touts its voluntary behavior codes, only to end up violating them, people start asking questions: What are the real reasons for these codes? Are they just for public relations (PR) purposes? To, as they say, 'cover your a*s' (CYA)? How did they arise? What, if any, value do they have? They Don't Need No Sponsored Health EducationTopics: children | corporations | health
Corporate-funded "educational" materials about healthy eating distributed to British schools have been criticized by Britain's Food Standards Agency, the Department of Health and dieticians' groups. "It's bad nutritional advice, which could give children wrong ideas about food at a very impressionable time," said Richard Watts of the Children's Food Campaign. The campaign is "assembling a dossier" on such materials, to prod the government to act. One pamphlet from the British Soft Drinks Association cautions students against refilling soda bottles with tap water, claiming it's "unsafe" and "can lead to contamination." A Dairy Council leaflet urges "three to four servings of milk, yoghurt or cheese" to "ensure that teenagers get all the calcium they need." Other sponsored materials direct students "to eat six slices of bread a day," claim that eating cheese "will soon have you a lot healthier," and compare soft drinks to "rice, pasta and bread." Sears to Start Selling Line of Official U.S. Military Garb
NCI: Tobacco Advertising, Smoking in Movies Contribute to Smoking RatesTopics: arts/culture | children | marketing | tobacco
|
Weekly SpinRecent blog posts
Upcoming events |