This is not systems thinking though. It take a lot of will for parents to fight kids desire for junk food from social pressure alone. Should parents be perfect citizens that make 10000 correct micro decisions a month correctly every time? Or can society help a bit by blocking some of the predators?

It is like "just say no". Thay'll do it for drug addicition. Simple.

more so in the past, there was a lot more food advertising directed at kids, because the thought was that kids could annoy their parents enough to drag the whole family to an establishment. and some marketing tricks work a lot better on children because of their social settings and general impulsiveness (e.g. "All the cool kids have Lunchables")

The milky bar kid is strong and tough

The red car and the blue car had a race

Turn the milk chocolatey

Keep hunger locked up tip lunch

I have tried to avoid adverts for 20 years, but the adverts of my childhood (not just ones aimed at kids - autoglass repair and replace, safe style do buy one get one free, dfs sale ends Sunday, ronseal quick drying wood stain does exactly what it says on the tin)

The brainwashing is sickening.

I still remember phone numbers from radio ads I heard as a kid. I don't have any phone number memorized apart from my own

HEAD ON! APPLY DIRECTLY TO THE FOREHEAD!!!!!

All red wants to do is stuff his face! Overeating bad, according to that ad. Other than Milky Ways.

> autoglass repair and replace, safe style do buy one get one free, dfs sale ends Sunday, ronseal quick drying wood stain does exactly what it says on the tin

A golem carved out of butter playing a trombone, an animated blue telephone, a puppy stealing toilet paper, Boddingtons.

Same vibes, different details.

> nd some marketing tricks work a lot better on children because of their social settings and general impulsiveness

Kids don't have the defenses against manipulation, especially when it's refined by billions in research dollars and decades of work by scientists and psychologists dedicated to exploiting their young minds.

Research has shown that kids (even into their teens) can't tell the difference between ads and content. They don't even know an ad when they see one, and the line between ad and content is often intentionally blurred. I've even seen adults struggle to identify ads when they're right in their face.

> Children pretty much have to eat what you give them until they get a job.

I don’t think this is true in practice; it feels sufficiently obvious that children’s tastes influence what they get fed that I’m not going to bother to find a citation

> Children pretty much have to eat what you give them until they get a job.

I don't believe you have children of your own; is this an armchair opinion or your own lived experience?

Anyway while on paper this is true, in practice kids will ask for this and may get it as a treat, or they may get it from somewhere else. And as a one-off, that's fine, but they do get influenced by ads to want more of it at any time. Same with fast food chains, somehow the ones that aren't available where I live got an almost mythical status with the teenager here. A Taco Bell did open here but honestly it was mediocre and overpriced.

Teens and so would be given money to buy food themselves, e.g. before/after going to football training, swimming, dancing etc.

Indeed, it's unrealistic to expect all kids would be served food and observed while eating.

>Children pretty much have to eat what you give them until they get a job.

Damn, someone better ring up the cereal companies and tell them to stop advertising, I bet they'll feel foolish realizing they've wasted all that money!

> Children pretty much have to eat what you give them until they get a job.

So.. then.. why are we advertising to them _at all_?

this is perverse, you understand they make a point about how easy it would be to not buy the cereal and they're right, a child does just HAVE to eat what you give them.

That children are a part of the decision making process is the failure.

The advertising works on the child, and ultimately the child (and the advert...directly to some extent but largely through the child) induces the parent to obtain the product.

> Children pretty much have to eat what you give them until they get a job.

If true why do cereal companies spend billions on advertising directly to children? For the fun of it?

I think its so children are open to eating it after the parents have bought it. If the food doesn't look appealing the parent will have to work harder but its the parents making the food choices not the child. Most of the time children don't even go to the grocery store with their parents.

So parents buy unhealthy food for their children without any prompting, and the kids need to have their minds opened to it by advertising, otherwise they wouldn't it?

I'm sure the cartoons and colors help the kids get motivated to eat the cereal

I'm pretty sure the massive amounts of sugar is all the motivation they need.

How do they know it has sugar just by looking at the food or the packaging?

the rainbow colored marshmallows tip them off.

Because most children aren't stupid and when something is called a "Fruit Loop" or the box displays pieces of cereal that resemble halloween candy they can make the connection to sugar.

Exactly. That's why I said "I'm sure the cartoons and colors help the kids get motivated to eat the cereal"

Tell me you have never had kids without telling me you’ve never had kids.

I have children

Through my own experiences I feel that if the parents allow them to have cereal as a starter, then the choice between Frosted Flakes and Cinnamon Toast Crunch will be up to the kid.

Personally I came from a family that never had cereal for breakfast, so that advertising never affected me -- it's not like I'd ever have it.

So targeting ads as the primary villain seems a bit like shifting responsibility away