BF2S Forums Fuck Happy Meals

Dilbert_X wrote:

As I said before, the simple thing would be to prevent companies marketing to children under a certain age.

cant market a hamburger to kids?  wow.  nazi alert.

Pretty hard to turn the TV off every 5 mins when the ads come on, and then there's product placement.

oh g@lt you're such an intelligent guy... please continue...

yeah, marine i do agree. they could have mandated some change to the CONTENTS of the happy-meal. but really i think the overall (more admirable and noble) cause is to do away with this form of subliminal, cheap and exploitative marketing. the glamorisation of the smoking industry in the millionaire-playground formula 1 racing league, the advertisement of cigarettes and alcohol on television without adequate warning/deterrment etc. we have come into a more 'responsible' and aware era of capitalism now where companies have to take some measure of responsibility for their consumers, and have to sell in an honest and ethical manner. the happy meal is just a hangover from the era of rapid-consumption with no thought to the consequences. toys sell more burgers? great! throw in lots of free toys. i agree that it's the parent's responsibility to look after their kids and to decide what they should and shouldnt eat, but i also think that companies and corporations should maintain their part of the deal and maintain an ethical trading practice. if you don't see the benefit or idea of this... then im beyond words, really.

yo, FM: THEY ARE NOT LEGISLATING AGAINST OBESITY. THEY ARE LEGISLATING AGAINST THE USE OF TOYS AND LURES IN MARKETING.

Last edited by Uzique (2010-04-30 06:27:20)

FM wrote:

Freedom means freedom to do smart and stupid things. You are being one of the naive people that want to limit free speech rights for people that are clearly three standard deviations away from sane.

Fine, let kids smoke from the age of five.
Put whisky ads on during Sesame Street.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-04-30 06:28:56)

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Uzique wrote:

some americans try way too fucking hard to stick to their absurd, arbitrary ideological guidelines...

look, it's a VERY SIMPLE precedent: kids are idiots. kids see bright awesome toy. kids put pressure on parents to have toy despite the dietary choice being... less than great. it's not about parents giving away their responsibility or shirking away from their role in place of faceless corporations; it's just that the happy meal idea either encourages shitty eating habits in children subliminally/ostensibly, or puts parents in shitty, difficult and awkward situations: give the kid the toy and keep them happy, or appear to be an asshole parent for denying your kid something they want for a reason that, essentially, they won't understand. macdonalds make enough profit and can sell enough burgers without using the carrot-on-a-stick that is a toy. if you don't understand it and you're getting all THIS IS AGAINST MAW CUNSTEETUSHUN then move to a fucking commune in the rocky moubntains and live on deer or some shit.

It's the parents job to be the asshole and to tell them no. It's not the parents job to be their friend. Kids aren't dolls, they don't exist for the parents amusement. If my kid grows up resenting me because I denied him a Happy Meal he can go fuck himself all the way to his whiny sniveling hipster friends of whom I'm sure at least one will be a sociologist/psychologist who can help him out.

The legislature can fuck off. They have no business intervening against obesity.

Freedom means freedom to do smart and stupid things. You are being one of the naive people that want to limit free speech rights for people that are clearly three standard deviations away from sane.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Pretty hard to turn the TV off every 5 mins when the ads come on, and then there's product placement.

Or don't turn on the TV in the first place? How could the first problem solving solution you come up with be turn off the TV when ads come on, as if TV is a necessity?

When did I want to limit free speech? :confused:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Fine, let kids smoke from the age of five.
Put whisky ads on during Sesame Street.

put sugar filled cereal ads on during cartoons...oh wait.  nobody cares about that.  mcd's evil.

Dilbert_X wrote:

FM wrote:

Freedom means freedom to do smart and stupid things. You are being one of the naive people that want to limit free speech rights for people that are clearly three standard deviations away from sane.

Fine, let kids smoke from the age of five.
Put whisky ads on during Sesame Street.

Or, take responsibility for yourselves and your children and stop blaming shit on other people. "The big bad marketing people got me to shoot heroin into my veins and now I'm addicted. Fuck!" You have free will. No one is forcing you to buy anything.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Or, take responsibility for yourselves and your children and stop blaming shit on other people. "The big bad marketing people got me to shoot heroin into my veins and now I'm addicted. Fuck!" You have free will. No one is forcing you to buy anything.

a) AFAIK heroin dealers don't really do marketing, at least not on TV. I suppose they may give away toys, dunno.

b) Marketing to children and adults are two different things.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-04-30 06:34:30)

you stated they're "legislating against obesity [...] and the freedom to make stupid decisions". they're obviously not. you're being reductionist and absurd. they're legislating against corporations dangling carrots-on-a-stick in front of consumers, leading them subliminally/ostensibly to buy products without any full awareness of what they are exactly purchasing. in the marketing/advertisement industry, the merits of the product alone should be enough to sell it to consumers, i.e. you shouldn't need toys and freebies to peddle a fucking hamburger. mcdonalds purposefully invest a lot of money into research and strategising the best way to sell their shit to children, it's a VERY CAREFULLY planned process. the logic? impress children with happy childhood memories of mcdonalds, and psychologically the children will be more likely to revisit the take-away at a later date- it's an underhand way to SUBCONSCIOUSLY boost LIFE-TIME CONSUMER LOYALTY. it's an unethical trading practice. mcdonalds can go on selling burgers, or whatever food they want - i don't care how healthy or unhealthy it is. i just don't agree with them influencing impressionable children's minds with toys. and you can argue against it all you want, but the studies and anecdotal evidence (viz. all of you adults here for one claiming how you much you enjoyed McD's as a kid) suggest that this toy thing is a pretty ethically reprehensible trick.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FM wrote:

Freedom means freedom to do smart and stupid things. You are being one of the naive people that want to limit free speech rights for people that are clearly three standard deviations away from sane.

Fine, let kids smoke from the age of five.
Put whisky ads on during Sesame Street.

Or, take responsibility for yourselves and your children and stop blaming shit on other people. "The big bad marketing people got me to shoot heroin into my veins and now I'm addicted. Fuck!" You have free will. No one is forcing you to buy anything.

You can't deny the fact that advertising campaigns work though.

They're designed to influence, and on children who are very easily influenced and live very much in the now, for them to harass a stressed parent till they get what they want, and market it simultaneously towards said parent by being sooooooo convenient (drive thru, cheap, quick), well really that shit does work.

Uzique wrote:

you stated they're "legislating against obesity [...] and the freedom to make stupid decisions". they're obviously not. you're being reductionist and absurd. they're legislating against corporations dangling carrots-on-a-stick in front of consumers, leading them subliminally/ostensibly to buy products without any full awareness of what they are exactly purchasing. in the marketing/advertisement industry, the merits of the product alone should be enough to sell it to consumers, i.e. you shouldn't need toys and freebies to peddle a fucking hamburger. mcdonalds purposefully invest a lot of money into research and strategising the best way to sell their shit to children, it's a VERY CAREFULLY planned process. the logic? impress children with happy childhood memories of mcdonalds, and psychologically the children will be more likely to revisit the take-away at a later date- it's an underhand way to SUBCONSCIOUSLY boost LIFE-TIME CONSUMER LOYALTY. it's an unethical trading practice. mcdonalds can go on selling burgers, or whatever food they want - i don't care how healthy or unhealthy it is. i just don't agree with them influencing impressionable children's minds with toys. and you can argue against it all you want, but the studies and anecdotal evidence (viz. all of you adults here for one claiming how you much you enjoyed McD's as a kid) suggest that this toy thing is a pretty ethically reprehensible trick.

There is nothing illegal or wrong about the carrot-on-a-stick. That defines advertising in anything. Kids can't make their own informed decisions - but kids don't have money either. If a parent can't say no then the kid is fucked period, a happy meal is the least of their problems. If the toy choice makes the kid want burger X over burger Y, that is good advertising. The kid doesn't have such discerning taste as we develop as we grow older, but the industry has found a way to differentiate in order to compete.

All that you spout off about consumer loyalty is just drivel. I had lots of happy meals as a kid, you think I don't know how bad fast food is for me? You think I'm a McDonald's zombie? You have a hilarious rich man's burden mindset.

since when are apples, milk, and a hamburger unhealthy?

11 Bravo wrote:

since when are apples, milk, and a hamburger unhealthy?

Since they put the hamburger part in?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-04-30 06:46:29)