Obesity Regulations 1

Obesity Regulations 1

Sarah Mason

May 13, 2013

samason@linfield.edu

Final essay

TOPIC: Obesity regulations

PROPOSED QUESTION: Should the government put stricter regulations in place on food and beverage advertising to children?

MODIFIED QUESTION: Should the government make the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative mandatory for all advertising companies?

MODIFIED QUESTION: Should the government ban food and beverage advertising to children?

MODIFIED QUESTION: Should the government implement multiple regulations to lower childhood obesity rates?

CURRENT QUESTION: Should the government enforce regulations on food and beverage advertising targeted at children and implement media literacy to reduce childhood obesity rates?

Table of Contents

Preface4

Abstract9

Essay10

Introduction10

Factors that Contribute to Childhood Obesity11

Toxic Eating Environment11

Consumer Driven Economy11

Lack of Cognitive Skills12

Attempts to Regulate Advertisements that Target Children13

The Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative13

Kid Vid Rule14

The Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children15

Stronger Regulations Needed16

Legal Obstacles17

Freedom of Speech17

Commercial Speech Doctrine17

Special Interest of Youth18

Advocacy Groups for Reversing Childhood Obesity 18

Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood18

Lets Move! Campaign19

The Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity19

The National Policy and Legal Analysis Network to Prevent Childhood Obesity19

Sensible Food Policy Coalition20

Alternatives to Bans on Food and Beverage Advertisements20

Media Literacy Programs20

Benefits of a Combination of Regulations and Media Literacy21

Conclusion21

References22

Preface

It has almost been a year since I was in Craig, Alaska visiting one of my college roommates when I received a special message in a bottle. Katrina Peavey, a fellow survivor of Information Gathering, had written a message about how to survive the dreaded class and sent the message from across the world to her mother, who later stuffed the note in a bottle and released it into the Pacific Ocean. Katrinas mother then took Carrie and I on a whale-watching trip when we noticed the floating bottle. Nothing in the message would quite prepare me for what I have experienced this past semester. Looking back I would agree with everything Katrina wrote in the message, set aside as much time to edit as you did to write, do not procrastinate under any circumstances, get used to Renshaw because it is open 24 hours and will be your new home, make sure you have a buddy because it will make those long gloomy nights and early mornings a little bit brighter, take advantage of Professor Thompson and Susan because they are your greatest resources and above all else, learn from your mistakes.

After feeling like I have killed an entire forrest of trees, spent a total of 91 days staring at my computer screen, accomplished five all nighters, called my parents too many times crying and debated on calling it quits on this whole college thing, I can say that I am officially surviving Information Gathering. Looking back on my own experience, Katrinas survival guide resonates on a much deeper level. I believe that the only way to truly understand the horror and beauty that Information Gathering has to offer is to throw yourself into the class feet first and experience it for yourself.

Before beginning Information Gathering in February, I was scared out of my mind. The class is intimidating and survivors certainly do not make the class sound fulfilling or doable in any way. I am not saying the class is fun or easy; however, I have never been so proud or worked so hard for something in my life. I have developed skills over the course of the semester that I will be able to apply to other Linfield classes, my future in Mass Communication and, as cheesy as it sounds, the rest of my life.

Information Gathering teaches a work ethic like nothing that I could have ever imagined. I have never been required to conduct such scholarly research, write, edit and turn in a 10 or more page paper, juggle class and work schedules and still find time to take care of myself on a weekly basis. Professor Thompson and Susan set the bar high and expect students to reach it. I have spent countless hours rotating between Renshaw, the Nicholson Library, Starbucks, Cornerstone, my dorm room and several secret study spots, trying to give myself a change of scenery and hang on to my sanity while still managing to turn in every assignment. I forced myself into thinking I enjoyed eating, sleeping and breathing Information Gathering. Making sacrifices is a huge part of this class. At times I sacrificed studying for my other classes, hanging out with friends and way too often, my sleep. This was a good life lesson because as we get older, commitments pile up and we are required to prioritize.

Growing up, my father has harped on the importance of working smarter and not harder. Before the semester began, as I dreaded the day I had to choose my public policy question, all I could think of was his advice. I knew it was important to choose a topic that I was genuinely interested in because I knew I would be spending a lot of my time reading about it. Because I am minoring in psychology and knew I would be taking Professor Weidmans advertising class, I decided to utilize my resources and choose a public policy question that would embody both of these elements. I am so happy I did.

By working smarter and not harder, I equipped myself with the tools necessary to perform to the best of my ability. Purchasing my Associated Press Stylebook was the best investment I have ever made. I would consider it to be like my fairy godmother, waving its magical wand over my grammatical worries. Before taking this class, I had no idea the wide range of entries that were contained in such a tiny book. My Associated Press Stylebook now contains an array of colorful tabs marking the most helpful entries that will assist me on future papers, newspaper stories and everyday curiosities, such as how to spell words like godmother. Also, to-do lists became my best friend. Every Sunday, after completing an entire day of newspaper, I made a master list of every commitment that I had in the upcoming week. Then, I took a large notecard and divided it into seven columns, and listed my hourly commitments so that I could see when I would have time to work on Information Gathering. I received some weird comments from people about this habit, but if there is one thing that I have taken away from this class, it is that you have to do what works best for you.

I am still not quite able to shake off the competitive nature Information Gathering brings out in students. I have been a competitive athlete, but never been much of a competitive student. It took time for me to adjust to the daily what did you get and how far are you questions frequently asked by my classmates. I realize now more than ever how insignificant it is to compare yourself to others because it does not matter how long an assignment takes you or what grade you receive as long as you are working hard and proud of what you produce. I was called out by a student in the class for taking longer to finish assignments than everyone else, which made the feeling of getting two perfect scores in a row that much sweeter.

The weeks leading up to Spring Break were the darkest. After catching up on rest, planning daily goals for the remaining two months of the semester and reminding myself that life exists outside of researching food and beverage advertisements, I was able to regain my strength and find a rhythm that worked for me. After regrouping, I experienced a significant change in my grade for this class, which I attribute to being more prepared and utilizing my resources. I had a panic attack during Spring Break when I realized my sisters college graduation fell on the day before the final papers due date. Instead of pulling my hair out like I felt like doing, I met with Susan who helped me strategize on how to make the best of use of my time and plan ahead.

I truly cannot put into words how appreciative I am of the opportunities I have had to learn from Professor Thompson and Susan. I am excited to go back through my notes and compile what has been discussed in class into a cohesive list of career tips, grammar mistakes and the other advice the professors have given. Professor Thompson and Susan provide the tools and resources needed to succeed; however, it is up to students to take full advantage of their knowledge. I have never taken a class from professors who are as willing as Susan and Professor Thompson are to assist you and help answer your questions.

Professor Thompson and Susan instill persistence in Information Gathering students. No matter how many times I edited my paper before turing it in, I could almost count on

it being returned and covered in purple ink come Monday morning. The professors stress the importance of learning from your mistakes, and tell you what to avoid on future assignments. It took a couple assignments for me to really understand the importance of recognizing my mistakes before I make them. Also, the researching process was frustrating at times. As a relatively new user of databases, I often became annoyed. In the beginning when I was searching for credible sources, more often than not the sources were not timely, were published in a different country, were too short or did not meet the requirements. This lead me to realize how important my search terms were. Lastly, while completing my 20 annotations, I stumbled upon a few authors who I could not find biographical information on. Instead of giving up, I utilized my resources and contacted authors via Twitter, Facebook and email to request more information about their education, experience and other credentials. I now realize why the class is called Information Gathering, because it is hard work digging up credible sources and useable information.

I would like to thank the people who were encouraging, supportive and inspired me to keep pushing each day. Alex Owen was the sweetest and most understanding roommate I could have ever asked for. Although there were times that I did not see for days on end, she was always there to keep me on track, respect my odd napping hours and roll with my mood swings. I am so appreciative for my parents for the encouraging text messages and calls to check up on me during the most stressful times. My older sister Shelby is one of the most hard-working people I know. Her ability to sacrifice fun to study for her nursing exams was truly inspiring to me, and it was comforting to know I was not the only one sacrificing fun for school. I would also like to thank Carrie for sticking by my side from the beginning. I am not sure if I would have been able to make it through the class with out her and we now share an interesting journey that we will talk about for years to come. I am thankful for Alyssa, Ivanna, Chris and Samantha for being a support system and making sure I did not slip through the cracks. Most of all, I would like to thank Professor Thompson and Susan for pushing me harder than I have ever been pushed before and showing genuine interest in my academics and life outside of Information Gathering.

I am sure Katrina would agree, as much as Information Gathering teaches us how to communicate effectively, it is difficult to put into words how truly beneficial of a class it is. Although future Information Gathering students will never really understand the class until they experience it for themselves, I hope to be as clever as Katrina was with helping future students calm the nerves before taking on the class. Now that I have experienced the class for myself, I am hoping to give the class a better reputation by communicating how tough it is, but how rewarding it is to see your hard work pay off. As difficult as Information Gathering is, I take away mostly positive experiences from the class and am excited to apply what I have learned to future classes, a career and becoming a better individual.

Abstract

The paper discusses the relationship between exposure to food and beverage advertisements and childhood obesity rates. Because children are exposed to a toxic eating environment, are immersed in a consumer-driven economy and do not contain the cognitive capacity to comprehend persuasive messages there is room for potential regulations on such advertisements. The paper will address the effectiveness of several attempts to regulate advertisements that target children, such as the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. It also looks at how regulations need to be strengthened and media literacy programs are necessary in order to reverse childhood obesity. The paper refers to the the First Amendment and the commercial speech doctrine that the advertising industry argues are barriers to act. The paper concludes that based on incongruities between legal justifications and psychological research, regulations on food and beverage advertisements that target children are justified.

Keywords: advertisement regulations, Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, consumer behavior, First Amendment, food and beverage companies, food literacy, Lets Move!, media literacy, obesity, obesity prevention, Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity

Introduction

"Taste the rainbow." "The snack that smiles back." "Unleash the power of the sun." "Obey your thirst. These are several of the most recognizable junk food and soda slogans that food and beverage advertisers use to target children. A total of $1.5 billion is spent on food and beverage advertisements each year. Children are exposed to more than 3,000 advertisements per day seen on television, the Internet, billboards, magazines, product packaging, sponsored events, product placements and character licenses (Mello, 2010). Nearly one third of children in the United States are obese, a population, which has more than doubled in the last 30 years. Studies have found a relationship between a childs exposure to food and beverage advertisements and obesity. Because eating habits, food preferences and brand loyalties are developed during childhood, it is important that advertisements encourage healthy habits that will carry over into adulthood (Lobstein & Dibb, 2005).

Obesity is defined as having excess body fat, which is the result of a caloric imbalance. The disease now contributes to more chronic illnesses and health care costs than smoking in the United States (The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, 2013). Childhood obesity poses serious immediate and long-term health threats, including high blood pressure, diabetes, joint problems, poor self-esteem and increased risk for cancer. Obesity-related issues contribute to 75 percent of national health care expenditures. Experts argue that government intervention is permitted to control and prevent health care costs (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2013).

This paper will address the three main factors that contribute to childhood obesity, which are a toxic eating environment, a consumer driven economy and childrens inability to comprehend persuasive messages. It will review past attempts to regulate advertisements that target children, explain why the First Amendment is not an obstacle to regulate advertisements, mention advocacy groups that are encouraging change and discuss an alternative to an outright ban of food and beverage advertisements that target children. The paper will conclude that a combination between stronger advertising regulations and media literacy programs are necessary to reverse childhood obesity.

Factors that Contribute to Childhood Obesity

Toxic Eating Environment

One factor that contributes to childhood obesity is the toxic eating environment. An eating environment is defined as the collection of physical, biological and social factors that affect an individuals eating habits. A toxic eating environment promotes unhealthy food and beverage consumption and can lead to obesity (Brownell & Horgen, 2004). The food industry designs their food and beverage products to be craveable and contain three addictive ingredients: salt, sugar and fat. The majority of the population in the United States cannot afford preparing meals from scratch to avoid eating products that contain these unhealthy ingredients (Moss, 2013). These cheap and accessible products include fast food meals, sugary drinks, candy and junk. For example, McDonalds emphasizes its cheap prices through advertising the Dollar Menu. The calorie-dense products advertised on television are sold in gas stations, drive-thrus, vending machines, drugstores and other 24-hour outlets (Scherzer, 2013).

Consumer Driven Economy

In addition to a toxic eating environment, children are immersed in a consumer-drive economy that encourages frequent spending and is a threat to health, education, creativity and values (Linn, 2004). Children are targeted by advertisers for two reasons: children have a great influence on their parents purchases and children are making decisions at younger ages in the marketplace. The influence is an estimated $500 billion for 2 to 14 year olds (Dietz, 2011). Advertisers use stealth weapons, a combination between new forms of digital advertising and manipulative strategies, to target children. The intention of these weapons is for children to develop personal relationships with food brands. Food and beverage advertisements associate products with fun, good times, popularity, happiness, achievement and athleticism to appeal to children (Bronstein, 2013). This is an issue because studies have found that children are susceptible to advertisements that use persuasive techniques, and in turn are more likely to purchase products that they advertised (Nauert, 2012).

Lack of Cognitive Skills

Children have not developed the critical thinking skills necessary to comprehend persuasive advertisements that put unhealthy products in a positive light (Nauert, 2012). Studies have found that when exposed to food and beverage logos, obese children show activation in reward areas of the brain, while normal weight children show activations in self-control regions of the brain. The study concluded that food and beverage advertisement regulations are necessary to prevent obese children from eating more (Blanchard, 2013). Food and beverage companies spend more than $10 billion on advertisements each year, half of which are for unhealthy products targeted at children. In 2007, a study found that from a sample of top-rated television programs among children, 98 percent of the advertisements were for products that contained salt, sugar and fat. Few advertisements were for fruits, vegetables and dairy products (United States, 2008). In addition, advertisements that trigger powerful emotional responses are more effective and create brand loyalty among children. The psychological processes commonly used in advertisements to attract children include the elaboration likelihood model, classical conditioning, mere exposure effect, associative network and social learning theory (Harris & Graff, 2012). Food and beverage advertisers use characters, celebrity endorsers, special effects and jingles to grab childrens attention. Children are not able to distinguish between fantasy and reality, and are likely to develop attachment issues and brand loyalties for products that use these persuasive techniques in their advertisements (Valkenburg, 2004). Parents are concerned that these marketing strategies are unethical and should be regulated (Vitell, 2010).

Attempts to Regulate Advertisements that Target Children

The Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative

In the past, the government has attempted to regulate advertisements that promote unhealthy food and beverage products that are said to contribute to childhood obesity. In 2005, 15 major food and beverage makers pledged to voluntarily self-regulate their advertisements that target children. The nutrition standards were created and policed by the United States Department of Agriculture dietary guidelines and United Stated Food and Drug Administration. The companies were asked to devote at least 50 percent of their advertising to the promotion of healthy diets and exercise. Several of the pledges include Burger King Corp., Campbell Soup Company, The Coca-Cola Company, The Dannon Company, The Hershey Company, Kellogg Company, PepsiCo, Inc. and Unilever United States (Association of National Advertisers, 2009).

Reaction

Some experts say that the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative yielded significant results, while others say the regulations should be stronger. Experts say the Initiative was a good start, but should be mandatory for all companies in order to experience a significant reduction in childhood obesity (Seidman, 2011). A study that coded for product type, persuasive appeal and production technique in advertisements that aired on television during 2004 and 2006, concluded that advertisers have not noticeably changed their marketing strategies since the 2005 initiative (Warren, Wicks, Wicks, Fosu & Donghung, 2007).

The Federal Trade Commission and Department of Health and Human Services were pleased with the advertising industrys improvements (Hippsley, 2008). Some networks now noticeably promote fruits, vegetables and dairy products and have limited advertising for unhealthy food and beverage products. Cartoon Network has demonstrated self-regulatory efforts because it primarily advertises toys to children and household appliances to parents who watch television with their children. The network airs public service announcements that combine cartoon characters and child actors to encourage physical activity during commercial breaks. However, even after the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, Nickelodeon still airs commercials for Juicy Drop Pop candy, Kelloggs Krave chocolate cereal, Goldfish crackers and Sprinkles Cookie Crisp cereal (First Presbyterian Church, 2013).

Kid Vid Rule

Similar to the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, the Kid Vid rule sought to regulate products that are harmful to childrens health. In 1978, the Federal Trade Commission proposed the Kid Vid rule in an attempt to reduce childrens dental cavities. The Kid Vid rule would ban all advertisements for sugary cereals; however, it was unclear what qualified as too sugary. The rule only be allowed advertisements for cereals if the commercials were accompanied by a health disclosure regarding cavities. (Hippsley, 2008). After much debate, the Kid Vid rule was not enacted.

Reaction

The advertising industry argued that the proposed Kid Vid rule would unfairly prohibit some cereal products from airing on television, while other competing cereals were authorized. Officials from the Federal Trade Commission learned how difficult it is to develop clear and workable standards to ban advertisement that target children (Delapoer, 2013). Since the 1978 attempt, the government has not attempted an outright ban on an entire category of product advertisements. Experts argue that although preventative services may be useful in containing public health issues, there are other contributing factors such as socioeconomic status and behavioral tendencies, which make bans less likely to be approved (Chen, Roy, Gotway & Crawford, 2013).

The Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children

The Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children is comprised of the Federal Trade Commission, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture. The group devised voluntary nutrition standards in an attempt to reverse childhood obesity through improved food and beverage advertising profiles (Dietz, 2011). For example, the voluntary standards encourage the use of cartoon characters and celebrity endorsements to promote fruits, vegetables and dairy products to children (Jalonick, 2013). The Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children says that because dietary habits are taught, encouraged and reinforced to children through advertisements, advertisements should encourage healthy eating habits (Bittman, 2012).

Reaction

The advertising industry argues that the voluntary standards proposed by the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children will affect more than 1,700 cable and broadcast programs. Richard OBrien, the executive vice president of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, says that the advertising industry has already responded to the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative and the new standards are too extreme (Eggerton, 2011). The Grocery Manufacturers Association says that food and beverage makers have changed 200,000 product recipes as a result of the initiative, and therefore voluntary regulations are effective (Adamy, 2011). Advertisers fear that failure to adhere to the new standards will lead to regulations on all forms of marketing communication.

Other experts agree with the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Childrens standards because it is the advertising industry, not the consumers, who decide what food and beverage products are the most desirable (Harris, Pomeranz, Lobstein & Brownell, 2009). The industry fears an entire category of products will be prohibited from television if the standards are enacted. Representatives say many cable and broadcast programs will be out of business because food and beverage advertisement account for a large sum of revenue. However, the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children is aware that a large percentage of food and beverage products will not meet the standards, and therefore the standards are subject to change (Eggerton, 2011).

Stronger Regulations Needed

Although the Federal Trade Commission has a troubled past with childrens advertising regulations and legal factors prohibit its ability to act, experts agree that these obstacles are actually opportunities to strengthen current regulations. According to the deception doctrine, misleading commercial speech is not protected by the Constitution, and therefore justifies stronger regulations on food and beverage advertisements that target children. In addition, experts encourage the Federal Trade Commission to provide mechanisms for making voluntary initiatives more effective. Considering the success from the Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, voluntary regulations are effective and if strengthened can yield substantial results (Mello, 2010).

Legal Obstacles

Freedom of Speech

The Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate ideas to anyone who is willing to receive them using ones own property. The food and beverage industry defend their right to advertise because they argue advertisements are the only way to differentiate and communicate their products to consumers. In addition, the industry says food advertisements that target children are rightfully protected by the Constitution and regulations strip them of this right (Harrison, 2012) However, the government says that commercial speech should not be protected by the First Amendment because food and beverage corporations are not people and the government has the ability to regulate speech that poses a threat to public health (Marshall, 2004).

Commercial Speech Doctrine

A common claim made by the advertising industry is that government regulations harm impede the free flow of information to consumers. Experts say that although the speech doctrine does guarantee protection to advertising, the Supreme Court states that misleading advertising is not entitled to First Amendment protection. False commercial speech can legally be banned to ensure that commercial speech serves a function (Harris & Graff, 2012). Advertising to children should be considered beyond the scope of First Amendment protection because cognitive research has demonstrated that children cannot effectively identify persuasive intent. Based on incongruities between legal justifications and psychological research, government regulations do not impose on constitutional rights (Graff, Kunkel & Mermin, 2012).

Special Interest of Youth

Because the Court has an independent interest in the well-being of its youth, regulations that protect children from the onset of obesity are permitted. The Ginsberg v. New York (1968) case involved a commercial vender selling obscene magazines to children. In its decision, the Court found that the government has an independent interest in the well-being of children. The First Amendment assumes that consumers have the full capacity for individual choice. Children have demonstrated that they do not have the full capacity for decision making processes, and therefore cannot be treated the same as adults. The government emphasizes the protection of children and public health. Ultimately, the wellbeing of children will override First Amendment rights (Centers for Disease Control, 2012). The Board of Health has the legal authority and responsibility to protect public health, and therefore regulations on advertisements that promote products that contribute to childhood obesity are justified (Sifferlin, 2013).

Advocacy Groups for Reversing Childhood Obesity

Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood

Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood is a national organization that is comprised of educators, parents, health care professionals and individuals who want to limit the influence of commercials on children. In addition, the organization targets advertisers and submits petitions to the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission asking for stronger regulations on advertisements (Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, 2013).

Lets Move! Campaign

Michelle Obamas campaign emphasizes the importance of advertising fruits, vegetables and dairy products to children through the use of characters and promotes active lifestyles. In addition, Obamas campaign is an advocate for media literacy programs in schools to help reverse childhood obesity (Jalonick, 2013). Obamas campaign has paired with Cartoon Networks Move It Movement Tour to give children ages 6 to 14 the opportunity to exercise through interactive games and sport competitions. Cartoon Networks campaign is designed to strategically use its brand assets to introduce strategies for reversing childhood obesity (Newsroom America Feeds, 2012).

The Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity

The goal of the Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity is to improve the worlds diet and prevent obesity through creative connections between science and public policy. The center conducts targeted research, encourages dialogue between the media, food and beverage companies and government officials, and explores public policies that will reverse the obesity epidemic (Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, 2013).

The National Policy and Legal Analysis Network to Prevent Childhood Obesity

The National Policy and Legal Analysis Network is part of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundations national childhood obesity prevention initiative and seeks to create healthier communities for children. The group funds local, state and federal efforts that seek to change public policies (Nestle, 2012).

Sensible Food Policy Coalition

Media businesses, food manufacturers and fast-food chains have created the Sensible Food Policy Coalition out of frustration with regulations. Members of the Sensible Food Policy Coalition include Time Warner, Viacom, PepsiCo, Kellogg and General Mills. The group has spent $6.6 million on lobbying efforts to develop voluntary guidelines on nutrition marketing on food and beverages aimed at children (Green, 2011). The Sensible Food Policy Coalition says that reversing childhood obesity is not a question of what is advertised, but rather healthier eating habits (The Association for Convenience and Fuel Retailing, 2011).

Alternatives to Bans on Food and Beverage Advertisements

Media Literacy Programs

It is difficult to shield children from advertisements that dominate a variety of media channels. Children have a difficult time distinguishing between reality and fantasy when exposed to advertisements found on the internet, in social media, on television, on the radio, on billboards and in virtually every part of daily life (Valkenburg, 2004). Therefore, media literacy will encourage children to be critical of the messages they are exposed to in the media (Klass, 2013). Schools should be a focal point for obesity prevention. In addition to physical education and nutritional standards in the cafeteria, schools should teach food and media literacy skills. The Institute of Medicine has five goals to end obesity; media literacy is among the top three (McKay, 2012). Media literacy will help reverse advertising related health problems because children will learn how to analyze, evaluate and understand persuasive advertisements (Strasburger & Wilson, 2002).

Benefits of a Combination of Regulations and Media Literacy

If stronger regulations are enacted, food and beverage makers would need to modify their products in content and packaging, to be advertised on television. Product modifications will likely lead to changes in eating behaviors among children and less consumption of unhealthy products. For example, in 2009 Tropicana changed the packaging for their orange juice cartons. Although the juice was still the same, the company experienced 20 percent fewer sales. If companies were required to modify their products in order to be advertised, it is possible childrens consumption behaviors would change (Laird-Magee, 2013). In addition, media literacy programs will equip children with the appropriate critical thinking skills needed to resist unhealthy food and beverage products that contribute to childhood obesity.

Conclusion

Obesity is a serious medical condition that affects children. Childhood obesity is troubling because the extra pounds often lead children on the path to health problems that were once confined to adulthood, such as diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol. As a result of a consumer driven economy, children are immersed in a toxic eating environment. Advertising companies spend large sums of money on marketing efforts to advertise unhealthy food and beverage products to children. Children are not fully developed cognitively to comprehend persuasive messages. The First Amendment does not protect deceptive or misleading speech, and therefore is not an obstacle to banning food and beverage advertisements. A combination between mandatory government regulations, such as the Childrens Food and Beverage Initiative, and implementing media literacy in schools would result in reduced childhood obesity rates.

References

Adamy, J. (2011, April 29). Tough new rules proposed on food advertising to kids. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/5v3c5zx

The Association for Convenience and Fuel Retailing. (2011, July 12). Sensible Food Policy Coalition battles government on obesity. NACS Daily. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ bpjo2jr

Blanchard, K. (2013, April 3) Interview by Sarah Mason. From notes.

Bronstein, C. (2013, February 26). The real battlefront for childhood obesity. [Blog]. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cqp92v6

Brownell, K. D., & Horgen, K. B. (2004). Food fight: The inside story of the food industry, Americas obesity crisis and what we can do about it. New York City, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood. (2013). Food marketing and childhood obesity. Retrieved on March 17, 2013 from http://tinyurl.com/ccrh97r

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Nutrition advertising targeting children. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/by54369

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Childhood obesity facts. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cfhal8

Chen, Z. A., Roy, K., & Gotway Crawford, C. A. (2013). Obesity prevention: The impact of local health departments. Health Services Research, 48, 603-627. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete.

Delapoer, J. (2013, April 30). Interview by Sarah Mason. From notes.

Eggerton, J. (2011, May 9). Food guides gall marketers: Warn restrictions could undercut advertising support to 1,700-plus TV shows. Broadcasting & Cable, 141, 23-24. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete.

First Presbyterian Church. (2013, March 31). Sunday morning day care watching cartoons; Vancouver. From personal observation and notes.

Fletcher, J. M., Frisvold, D., & Tefft, N. (2010). Can soft drink taxes reduce population weight? Contemporary Economic Policy, 28, 23-35. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Academic Search Premier.

Food marketing: Can voluntary government restrictions improve childrens health? 112th (2011) (testimony of William Dietz). Retrieved February 13, 2013, Retrieved from http:// tinyurl.com/bu3jmoe

Graff, S., Kunkel, D., & Mermin, S. E. (2012). Government can regulate food advertising to children because cognitive research shows that it is inherently misleading. Health Affairs, 31, 392-398. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Academic Search Premier.

Green, A. E. (2011, October 14). Curtains for Capn Crunch. The Washington Times. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/43hmao7

Harris, J. L., & Graff, S. K. (2012). Protecting young people from junk food advertising: Implications of psychological research for First Amendment law. American Journal of Public Health, 102, 214-246. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Academic Search

Premier.

Harris, J. L., Pomeranz, J. L., Lobstein, T., & Brownell, K. D. (2009). A crisis in the marketplace: How food marketing contributes to childhood obesity and what can be done. Annual Review of Public Health, 30, 211-225. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Academic Search Premier.

Harrison, J. (2012, February 2). DesJarlais introduces legislation to end stimulus funded attack ads against soft drink industry. Nooga. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/crcsq8m

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2013). Health Care Costs. Retrieved on April 6, 2013 from http://tinyurl.com/7x36ysy

Hippsley, H. (2008, April 14). Panel on obesity and marketing to kids: A moving target. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the food update foundation, Ponte Vedra, Florida. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/buxde5u

Jalonick, M. C. (2013, March 9). First lady pushes food industry. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved from Lexis Nexis Academic.

Klass, P. (2013, February 11). How advertising targets our children. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/andwegf

Laird-Magee, T. (2013, March 6) Interview by Sarah Mason. From notes.

Lobstein, T. T., & Dibb, S. S. (2005). Evidence of a possible link between obesogenic food advertising and child overweight. Obesity Reviews, 6(3), 203-208. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/a9emnqj

Marshall, W. P. (2004). False campaign speech and the First Amendment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 153(285). Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cc8y9g5

McKay, B. (2012, May 9). The ABCs of beating obesity. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cyp5pu5

Mello, M. M. (2010, April). Federal Trade Commission regulation of food advertising to children: Possibilities for a reinvigorated role. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 35(2), 228-276. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cuc8e56

Moss, M. (2013). Salt, sugar, fat: How the food giants hooked us. New York City, NY: Random House.

National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. (2013). What causes overweight and obesity: Lack of energy balance. National Institutes of Health. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/aw9tf95

Nauert, R. (2012). Obese kids more susceptible to food ads. Psych Central. Retrieved on March 19, 2013 from http://tinyurl.com/cjrpxrp

Nestle, M. (2012, Sept. 4). How regulation really does change eating behavior. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/bmbaom3

Newsroom America Feeds. (2012, May 21). Turner Newsroom notification: Cartoon Network launches third annual Move it Movement Tour. Newsroom America. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/bqcwloh

Patel, R. (2012, February 6). Abolish the food industry. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http:// tinyurl.com/6so7ugt

Sifferlin, A. (2013, March 12). Judge blocks ban of big sodas in New York City. Time. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ajc4zgo

United States. Cong. Senate. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services. Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government. Joint Hearing. Watch what you eat: Food marketing to kids. 110th Cong., 2nd sess. Washington: GPO, 2008. Retrieved on March 16, 2013 from http://tinyurl.com/

cerzt5u

Valkenburg, P. M. (2004). Childrens responses to the screen: A Media psychological approval. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Vitell, S. (2010). The ethics of food advertising targeted toward children: Parental viewpoint. Journal of Business Ethics, 91 299-311. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Academic Search Complete.

Warren, R., Wicks, J., Wicks, R. H., Fosu, I., & Donghung, C. (2007). Food and beverage advertising to children on U.S. television: Did national food advertisers respond? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 795-810. Retrieved from http:// tinyurl.com/a7vshq4

World Health Organization. (2010). Set of recommendations on the marketing of foods and non-

alcoholic beverages to children. Retrieved on March 16, 2013 from http://tinyurl.com/

cejyt3p

Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. (2013). Whats cooking at the Rudd Center. Retrieved on March 17, 2013 from http://tinyurl.com/mvkkqm

Rachel DATE \@ "M/d/yy h:mm AM/PM" 4/6/13 11:32 PM

Move this to the next page

Rachel DATE \@ "M/d/yy h:mm AM/PM" 4/6/13 11:32 PM

Move this to the next page