Children as Consumers
Exhibit Curators: Akiva Weinstein, Kate-Lynn Rice, Gabrielle Bohner, Rahel Knight, & Yassah Fello
In this week’s reading material, The Material Child we discuss the power and impact of consumer culture. ‘Children’s parents as the true consumers’ explores the pressure parents feel when buying products and the different marketing tactics that influence parents in their purchasing decisions. ‘The fear of fat’ explores how advertisements and marketing target children which can lead to child obesity. One way this is done is by running deals at grocery stores for snacks as well as fast food establishments running bundle deals for their meals. Both the children and the parents opt for these deals involving food as it appears to be “more bang for your buck”. ‘Exploited or empowered’ discusses the pressure on parents with buying products that are targeted for children. These products were advertised through television commercials with children in the commercials to make the products appear relevant to children. ‘Cultural influences on perceptions of consumerism’ explores the power of words on product labels when it comes to advertising. Histories of children’s consumption explores the development, the emergence, and age and gender regarding marketing.
As you read:
– Refer to the questions regarding diapers at the bottom of ‘children’s parents as the true consumers’.
-Think about how children obesity is different from our country compared to other countries and how marketing contributes to that.
-Think about how commercials and advertisements have changed for children products.
-Consider if you pay for products simply because of how the label looks as well as the wording it uses such as “organic”, “clinically proven”, etc.?
– Consider How child consumer culture affects you.
Children’s Parents as the True Consumers
(The Material Child Chapter 8)
The funny thing about Children as consumers is that for many years of their lives, they aren’t the driving force of their own consumerism. It’s their parents, in fact, who are the ones with control and buying power. Consider for a moment the baby registry: the list expecting parents send out to friends/families with all the stuff they want for their littles. Our culture in the U.S. is a consumerist one; and the birth of a child is a wonderful opportunity, if you work in marketing or for a company that sells items for children, to score a buck. The idea of purchasing goods for children – usually stuff they don’t actually need – is so prevalent that a Google search for data on what percent of expecting parents start a baby registry, yields the results “Why You Might Want a Second Baby Registry—and How To Make One” (Babylist), and “How Many Baby Registries Should I Make? Benefits to Creating Multiple Registries” (whattoexpect). It’s sickening. The reading this week, The Material Child, discusses children and their parents as consumers in Chapter 8 ‘Pester Power’:
“Most of children’s spending is in fact parents’ spending: it is parents who pay, even if it is children who consume or use what they buy…Marketers are [sic] very much aware of the influence of parents on children’s consumer behavior”
(Buckingham D. 2011, p.143)
It’s with this premise, that the exploration of the marketing of baby diapers should be explored. If you didn’t know, most brands of baby diapers are typically full of harmful chemicals. Considering our country is one that values profit over people, it’s no surprise that baby diapers are laden with chemicals that cause Cancer; permanently mess with babies’ endocrine system; cause skin issues; and more. (National Institute of Health). Some of the harmful chemicals commonly found in diapers are: Phthalates, Formaldehyde, Dyes, and more. In fact, regulation in Europe don’t allow many of the chemicals found in baby products to be sold. Some states in the U.S. (mostly Blue, Democrat states) have higher regulation than the U.S. as a whole, and lobbyists have fought against those states for years for the deregulation of the clothing industry (guess which Political party they lobby with). As a side note, the exploration of toxic chemicals found in children’s toys and furniture is of note, and can be expanded upon in a further assignment.
As organic and clean living has been a rising trend in the U.S., of course there has been a rise, too, in the marketing towards parents who are worried about exposing their children to these harmful chemicals. (USDA)
Take a look at the marketing of some of the following “conscious” diaper brands, and notice the similarities (and price!). Do note, that babies go through A LOT more diapers per day than you would expect, especially when they are very young, so when considering price per day, multiply your original thinking of how many diapers a kid will need by 2 or even 3.
Diaper #1: “Dyper” brand. With the caption: “Soft and absorbent with plant-based liners. Made without lotions, parabens, fragrances, and prints. Price: $0.93/diaper
(accessed from Amazon.com)
Diaper #2: “Honest” Brand. “Clean conscious diapers with FSC certified fluff pulp and other controlled materials. Hypoallergenic inner lining. Super cute Prints. Without Latex. Fragrances. Parabens. NEW CONSCIOUSLY CERTIFIED.” Price: $0.68/diaper
(accessed from Amazon.com)
Diaper #3: “Pampers” brand “swaddlers” that say: “U.S. Hospitals #1 Choice of Nurses and Parents.” Price: $0.27/diaper.
Note the absence of any related information, which by the lack of, one can deduce what is contained in these diapers.
(accessed from target.com)
Here are a few thoughts to ponder as you review these diaper summaries:
- If you were a new parent aware of the health-issues and toxic chemicals contained in diapers, which diapers would you choose?
- On the Pampers brand diaper, there is no warning label of the harmful chemicals contained within. Should there be, the way there is a prop65 warning on consumer goods, or the way several countries place a salt warning on snack products?
- What do you think the public outcry would be if more people were aware of harmful chemicals contained in diapers?
- Is the access to healthy diapers equal? Or does the price difference between the more expensive diapers indicate a deeper societal issue?
- Are marketers using fear-mongering to sell more expensive diapers, or providing a public service to keep kids healthy?
works cited
Amazon.com. (n.d.). Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.amazon.com/
Bernard, A. (2022). Dermal exposure to hazardous chemicals in baby diapers: A re-evaluation of the quantitative health risk assessment conducted by the french agency for food, environmental and occupational health and safety(Anses). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(7), 4159. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074159
Campbell, N. R. C., Webster, J., Blanco‐Metzler, A., He, F. J., Tan, M., MacGregor, G. A., Cappuccio, F. P., Arcand, J., Trieu, K., Farrand, C., Jones, A., Whelton, P. K., & Zhang, X. (2019). Packages of sodium (Salt) sold for consumption and salt dispensers should be required to have a front of package health warning label: A position statement of the World Hypertension League, national and international health and scientific organizations. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension, 21(11), 1623–1625. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.13698
How many baby registries should i make? Reasons to make multiple registries. (n.d.). Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.whattoexpect.com/baby-products/registry/how-many-baby-registries-should-i-make
How-to-create-second-baby-registry. (n.d.). Babylist.Com. https://www.babylist.com/hello-baby/how-to-create-second-baby-registry
Pfas update: Children’s products regulations, february 2023. (n.d.). BCLP – Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner – PFAS Update: Children’s Products Regulations, February 2023. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.bclplaw.com/en-US/events-insights-news/pfas-update-childrens-products-regulations-february-2023.html
Target: Expect more. Pay less. (n.d.). Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.target.com/
Usda ers—Rising consumer demand reshapes landscape for u. S. Organic farmers. (n.d.). Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2023/november/rising-consumer-demand-reshapes-landscape-for-u-s-organic-farmers/
(N.d.). Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.p65warnings.ca.gov/
Chapter 6: The Material Child – The Fear of Fat, David Buckingham
It is obvious that the impact of publicity and marketing approaches targeting children, which often promote unhealthy foods high in sugar, fat, and calories, can shape children’s preferences and stimulate their food choices, contributing to poor dietary behaviors and an augment the risk of obesity. Additionally, there are some factors that intersects with children long-term health outcomes including the availability of surplus food, parental influence, socioeconomic status, and politics.
A comprehensive approach for addressing the fear of obesity in children requires the participation of everyone including policymakers, healthcare professionals, businesses, educators, food manufacturers, and parents. The need to regulate food consumption is very crucial. Children must have access to healthy foods and nutritional education must be constantly promoted in all aspect of life. When the nation work together for the safety of the children, it will be possible to decrease childhood obesity rates and improve global health outcomes.
“In this case, my analysis suggests that, despite the appeal to scientific evidence, the decision to ban HFSS food advertising was politically driven: the government needed to be seen to be ‘doing something’ about the problem of child obesity……” (Buckingham, 2013)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/nov/03/child-obesity-levelling-off
The report’s author warns that despite the apparent levelling off of child obesity, numbers remain unacceptably high.
The Department of Health and Social Care says it is taking bold action to tackle obesity, including ending supermarkets deals like “buy one, get one free” on unhealthy food.
According to “Children as Consumers”, by Anup Shah, it is stated that parents have difficult times restricting their children from eating unhealthy foods. Most children nowadays eat fast food. Moreover, it is concluded that eating healthy foods is an individual choice and parents are a huge part of the problem.
Statistics from Global Issues: Social, Political, Economic and Environmental Issues That Affect Us All:
Advertising to children is big business:
Children are a captive audience: The average American child watches an estimate between 25,000 to 40,000 television commercials per year. In the UK, it is about 10,000.
$15-17 billion is spent by companies advertising to children in the US. Over $4 billion was spent in 2009 by the fast-food industry alone.
The marketing seems to be worth it. For example,
Teens in the US spend around $160 billion a year
Children (up to 11) spend around $18 billion a year
Tweens (8–12-year-olds) heavily influence more than $30 billion in other spending by parents, and 80 percent of all global brands now deploy a tween strategy.
Children (under 12) and teens influence parental purchases totaling over $130-670 billion a year.
Work Cited:
Buckingham, D. (2013). The Material Child. Available from: MBS Direct, Wiley Professional, Reference & Trade (Wiley K&L)
MBS Direct: The Material Child (vitalsource.com)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/nov/03/child-obesity-levelling-off
England will miss 2030 target to halve childhood obesity, says report | Health | The Guardian
Children’s Exposure to Television Advertising in 1977 and 2004: Information for the Obesity Debate, FTC, June 1, 2007. This report says 25,600 commercials were watched in 2004 by children in the US.
Television Advertising Leads to Unhealthy Habits in Children; Says APA Task Force, American Psychological Association (APA), February 23, 2004. Is an example of the widely cited 40,000 commercials figure
The Material Child Chapter 1: Exploited or Empowered?
“From the moment they are born, children today are already consumers” (Buckingham, 2011, p. 5).
Let this marinate. Is this quite literal? What are your thoughts? Do you agree? To what extent? In what context?
Chapter 1 of The Material Child discusses the following: constructing the child consumer, the construction of social problems, the problem of the child consumer, childhood at risk, toxic childhood syndrome, modern life, and kid power.
When people think of their childhood, they think of memories. Some might connect their childhood with some of their favorite toys. Some of the most well-known toys in the 90s (whether it be for you, for your kids, or for relatives) were: Easy Bake Oven, Tamagotchi, Brite-Lite, Etch a Sketch, Moon Shoes, NERF Super Soaker, Bop It, Stretch Armstrong, and so much more! What did all these toys have in common? They had a commercial on TV (specifically on a kid-friendly channel because they knew children would be watching) and advertised these products with children in the commercials to make these products more relatable to children. The famous words in every household were, “I WANT THAT!” while pointing to the TV. Aside from TV commercials for toys, children also starred in commercials for food (soda SURGE, Dunkaroos), sports, and clothing commercials.
(Photos Obtained from YouTube.com)
This put a lot of pressure on Parents. It eventually split Parents into two categories in children’s minds – “good” Parents and “bad” Parents. Parents felt the pressure to buy everything their child wanted. What kind of child did that Parent just create? Entitled? Spoiled? Ungrateful? Children do not know any better when they see advertisements featuring content that is specifically age appropriate. Thus, the power of marketing! Here are some Questions & Talking Points for Kids 5 to 8 Years Old
(Visual Obtained from National Financial Educators Council)
Work Cited
YouTube.com
Buckingham, David. The Material Child : Growing up in Consumer Culture, Polity Press, 2011.
Tips to teaching kids about advertisements. NFEC. (2023a, October 12). https://www.financialeducatorscouncil.org/tips-to-teaching-kids-about-advertisements/
Chapters Two and Three:
Cultural Influences on Perceptions of Consumerism
“This approach is clearly suffused with cultural judgments about aesthetics and taste and with moral judgments such as the dangers of self-indulgence and excess” (Buckingham, p. 28).
As seen previously in this gallery, there is a wide variety of products available to children and their parents. This is often delineated by words such as “organic” or “natural”, as in this product’s advertising:
Photo and product accessed from Target.com
Note that the title of the product emphasizes that it has the “Certified Cleanest Ingredients” and “Whole Nutrition”. The packaging is trendy and attractive. It also points out several other additives. This box of formula costs $41.99 according to the Target website.
In contrast, this baby formula is more affordable at $19.99. Note that the packaging still addresses some ingredients, but isn’t noted as “clean” or “whole nutrition”. It’s also less aesthetically trendy to today’s consumers.
Photo and product sourced from Target.com
These two offerings of baby formula at Target are clearly different in terms of aesthetic, claims, and price. The message is clear: more affluent parents can afford pretty packaging with buzzwords like “clean” food, while parents on a budget must suffice with the more “basic” affordable baby formula.
Also, interestingly, baby formula is one of the most commonly stolen items nationwide. “Baby formula accounts for 13% of the most stolen items from stores, according to the NRF 2020 Organized Retail Crime survey” (Baby Formula Is Getting Harder to Find – CBS Baltimore, 2021). It seems parents are struggling to afford even the more affordable formula. This gatekeeping of higher quality formula is a cultural judgment between parents who can afford the top-shelf formula vs. parents who can afford the less-expensive or even need to steal in order to feed their children. In this case, it truly is the parents who are the consumers, since they are the ones being influenced by packaging and cultural influences.
Works cited:
Target Website
https://www.target.com/p/byheart-whole-nutrition-powder-infant-formula-24oz/-/A-87956594#lnk=sametab
Baby Formula Is Getting Harder To Find – CBS Baltimore. (2021, November 16). Www.cbsnews.com. https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/baby-formula-is-getting-harder-to-find/
Chapter 4: Histories of Children’s Consumption
The Development of Modern Consumerism
Consumerism has existed for centuries, both within the United Staes and in a global sense. Slater even argued that consumerism, at its simplest form, can be traced back to the sixteenth century when Queen Elizabeth I popularized extravagant balls to display wealth among the upper classes. Considering this fact, it was concluded that consumerism matched trends in society as demand for capitalist goods began to rise. It is important to note that consumerism is not the same as capitalism, rather it can be considered a product in the sense that consumerism is the psychological drive to purchase items marketed in a capitalist society. Now the factors going into that psychological drive vary from region to region, but in essence they all follow societal trends and demands.
“Consumption becomes the privileged medium for negotiating identity and status within a post-traditional society “(p.69)
The Emergence of the Child Consumer and Parental Ambivalence, Toys and Play
The child consumer is not anything new; it can be traced back to the sixteenth century with the large-scale production of goods specifically catered to children (ex: clothing for wealthy families) As the romantic depiction of childhood developed, a shift in consumerism began. Children were seen as being innocent beings yet also this brand-new market to cater to. Two main aspects of said market include 1. commodifying the image of the child and 2. marketing goods intended to “preserve the unique character of childhood”. It is also important to note that during this time, children were still being used as a labor source, yet somewhere mid 19th century children’s economic value as laborers was slowly replaced by their emotional value. As emotional value increased, so did parental involvement, which lead to a rise in “play”. Play became essential to the child’s educational growth, which also increased the value of toys. As Play demands increased, family sizes decreased because “play was seen as a means of reinvigorating family relationships, and thereby ensuring the emotional wellbeing of both children and parents” (p.72)
Toys have a profoundly ambivalent role. On one hand they served parents’ hopes and aspirations and were celebrated for their educational value yet on the other hand, they became the focus of fears and anxieties about economic exploitations…” (p. 73)
The ‘Empowerment’ of the Child Consumer and Segmenting the Market: Age and Gender
There became a new emphasis on children’s autonomy as consumers in the early to mid 1900s which was evident with the rise in participatory marketing. The best example I can give for this would be the scene in A Christmas Story when Ralphie decodes the message with the decoder he got in the mail. This type of marketing was significant because it was the first of its kind to actively seek parental exclusion, empowering the cild because they felt they knew more than their parents.
Marketing directly to children resulted in the segmentation between genders leading to a “pink and blue” shopping experience for most children. By saying this, when you went to the toy sections you would see that the toys marketed to boys were cars or plastic weapons whereas for young girls they would be marketed dolls and tea sets. Much of this was because of the defined adult gender rolls of those creating the marketing content, and they projected their societal standards onto the children.
Works Cited
Buckingham, D. (2011). The material child : Growing up in consumer culture. Chapter 4. Polity Press.
Concluding Thoughts
Congratulations, you’ve made it to the end of the exhibit. Since you’re here, let’s give a little summary of what you saw. First you read about the true consumer behind child consumerism, the parent. Despite children being the main target of certain products, the parent is the one purchasing said product. You even saw an excellent example of this notion with diapers in the US. You then went on to read about children and their eating habits, recognizing that children are the constant target of marketing tactics performed by unhealthy food corporations. It was even written that the food markets purposefully target children because they are a captive audience who can manipulate their parents to make purchases for them and the rest of the family, which in turn drives up profits. Next you made your way to learning the difference between being exploited and empowered. By actively using children to sell products to children, is that empowering the child, or exploiting their nature? While you worked through that thought you carried your way over to cultural influences on consumption and learned that there is a deliberate marketing approach to supposed “clean” and “healthy” child products, with the great example of baby formula to help you think through this information. Last but not least, you were led to the overall history of child consumption. You learned about what child consumption looked like from the 1600s to present day, recognizing that he market utilizes special tactics to cater to certain genders and actively exclude the parent from childhood consumerism.
We hope that you’ve enjoyed this exhibit, and let us know your thoughts or questions below! We will do our best to answer anything you see! Happy commenting 🙂
What a great exhibit! The question on whether one agrees or disagrees with the statement, “from the moment they are born, children today are already consumers” stood out to me. I began to reflect on the varying ways children may be seen as consumers. The first thing that comes to mind is correlation to this claim is the type of child consumer that results from watching television and the plethora of commercials children witness. They see a battery-operated pony, barbies, or the new Lego edition. Either way they may be quick to become influenced and begin begging their parents for one of these toys. Then I stopped and began to think of the other type of “consumer” that children may be. This is consumers of knowledge. Children are constantly learning the world from birth and through growth. They learn to read, eat, and how the world works. I agree that children are consumers from birth and there on.
Curator: Yassah Fello
You are right Julia.
When children reach the stage of reasoning and comparison, they become more aware of their surroundings and began to request everything they see. They consume everything that comes their way like a locust (laugh). Moreover, children become critical with what they need by exhibiting negative behaviors. Even though it is sometimes okay to allow children to be independent in making their choices, it becomes detrimental to their heath. Therefore, they must be supervised at all times.
Thank you for posing such a thought provoking comment. Initially, I was focused on children just being consumers of items (toys, clothes, etc.) and hadn’t even considered them as being consumers of knowledge. Looking through consumerism through that lens these children are just trying to learn about the world around them. Everything they see, hear, and interact with is completely new to them. So of course they are going to want to play with anything possible because it is new! While I do think somethings are overdone when it comes to newborns / babies especially on the part of the parents I am wondering if we can truly classify children as the real consumers until they are able to actively think (and even speak) for themselves?
Julia,
I love your comment about how children are not only consumers of advertisements but also consumers of more beneficial elements such as knowledge. When I initially read this week’s assigned material I saw the term consumer as a negative. It filled my mind with the manipulation of children for someone’s financial gain, but your comment brought me a new insight into the term. To be a consumer doesn’t have to be bad. It can benefit more than one person; it can benefit society as well.
Hi, Julia! While reading the exhibit, I also thought of where I stand on this reflective quote. Going along with your examples, I thought of the motorized battery-operated cars that kids used to be able to sit in and drive around the driveway or yard. That was such a popular “toy” I remember seeing around the neighborhood. Kids would go crazy over wanting to drive them, wanting to play with their friends’, wanting to own one, etc. I have been trying to think about what some of today’s toys are that are very popular and have the kids being the consumer. I thought of some of the Squishmallow stuffed animals, Pokemon products, and the rubber bands that can be made into friendship bracelets. It is so interesting to me to watch the trends over time, but the tactics of advertising and reaching certain demographics stay the same.
Hi Julia,
I was curator for that section, including that quote. As soon as I read it in the reading, I was like, “ooooooof that is a good one!” I had to share it here in the main exhibit as it really gets you thinking! It is so powerful and sets the tone for the rest of the chapter.
Thank you for your hard work on this exhibition! I would like to comment on this idea: ” ‘Children’s parents as the true consumers’ explores the pressure parents feel when buying products and the different marketing tactics that influence parents in their purchasing decisions.” It is true that the parents are the consumers of products for children of younger ages. However, starting at a fairly young age, probably the pre-teen and teeange years, there are products that are definite marketed directly to this age group. For example, vape products have been pushed into the hands of children for years and only recently, the issue is being addressed. I find it appalling that this was permitted to happen. It makes me realize that our nation cares more about commerce than people.
https://time.com/6271149/juul-settlement-marketing-kids/
Karen, I completely agree with your statement regarding children becoming consumers by the time they are pre-teens. When I think of pre-teens being consumers I automatically think of the ‘latest trends’ as there are so many things that are marketed to young children that are in for a little and then out. So when something new comes out and it is highly promoted to the younger market it becomes a fad – they use it for a little and then it gets pushed to the side for something else. For example, water bottles – for awhile Hydroflasks were the cool brand and people went crazy buying them and putting stickers on them. Now, it is Stanleys so all the Hydroflasks have been tossed to the side for this newer cooler water bottle. It has blown my mind that I have seven / eight year olds in my class with their own miniature Stanley water bottles. Which leads me to believe that they are purposefully being designed and targeted to a young audience.
I wanted to share this relevant video: How Advertising Rewires Kids’ Brains…
https://youtu.be/hGN1ZEABk_Y?si=n2u3hlHQFVajTl9E
Hey there Karen! Wow that video really emphasizes the impact that advertising/material items have on children and their minds. It was sad to see that they’re beginning to associate material items with happiness. This makes me reflect on the idea that “money can’t buy happiness” and how true to life that is.
Hi!
Very interesting video. For my side exhibit this week (Group A) I posted a podcast with Dr. Susan Linn (she’s an expert on creative play and the impact of media and commercialism on kids). It was such a long podcast that I didn’t even really write about this part, but there was part of that podcast where she talks about kids who are intrinsically versus extrinsically motivated. That’s a topic we speak about at my school sometimes- brainstorming ways to increase intrinsic motivation. And it’s tough! But I think this discussion highlights this connection between extrinsic motivation and potentially fleeting levels of happiness.
Great job on this exhibit!!
Karen, thanks for posting this video! I thought the idea of asking questions about the ads is a great one. It helps children become more aware of the advertiser’s agenda and their own responses. Just to have this in our discussion, here’s a link to The Story of Stuff Project: https://www.storyofstuff.org/
And here’s a link to the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (Fairplay) website: https://fairplayforkids.org/author/ccfc/
Karen, thanks for sharing this video. One of the suggestions was to reduce the amount of time children have with media/screen time. This seems obvious to me, but this idea gets a lot of pushback. In my own home, we have and do limit screen time. Our focus is on reading, physical activities, and DOING things. My adult boys have thanked us for this focus. As adults, they each have a wide variety of interests and intentionally choose how they engage with screen time. They lead interesting lives that are not dominated by being entertained by media. Reducing screen time is a good option.
Karen,
I agree that starting at birth children are highly exposed to the consumer choices of their parents, as they grow and start to find their identity and their individual voice in consumerism I think there is a heavy shift in the role of influence on the child from parents to peers. Children want what other children have. For example, the super irrational hype of Stanley Cups. At the beginning of this year, I had maybe one or two within my classroom and now it seems like every kid has one. It has become the “popular” thing and if you don’t have one that speaks volumes to one’s peers and their ranking socially.
Karen,
Your entry reminds me of a conversation I have had with some friends of mine regarding Christmas presents for kids. As babies, there isn’t as much of a pressure to get a bunch of crazy toys. Honestly, you get the baby a bunch of toys and they are more entertained by a wooden spoon. As they develop intellectually, they become more curious and they begin to develop an imagination for playtime. This factors in what toys kids want, but also what they see others playing with at school or down the street. While kids have always wanted to newest and hottest toy down the street for generations now, having that toy and hundreds of other toys in your face and on-screen every day is a newer reality. It does feel like while the parent is the consumer, marketers target the child.
Thanks for sharing!
Hi Karen,
Thank you for sharing the link to that article. I actually had no idea that Juul vaping products were being marketed to kids/teens. When I first read your comment I was appalled and felt like it couldn’t possibly be true. But clearly it is. How awful!
Thank you for the wonderful exhibit! You all posed the question, “is the access to healthy diapers equal? or does the price difference between the more expensive diapers indicate a deeper societal issue?”. Even though this question was posed in the first section of your exhibit, it was one that I kept thinking of as I continued reading especially in regards to food. Even though parents may know about the harmful chemicals included in diapers the price difference could prohibit them from acting on their knowledge. For example, I used to be a nanny for a one year old and he would go through eight to ten diapers a ten depending on the day. With those numbers in mind; you could either spend $9.30 OR $2.70 just in one day. For some families even the $2.70 is a lot to spend on diapers just for one day so how could they ever spend close to $10. Now in terms of food (organic / fast food) it is commonly known that “healthier” foods are more expensive than “junk” food. Therefore, parents are faced with the decision of getting less but better quality food or more poor quality food. Ultimately, I think it comes down to how we have forced a clear distinction to be made due to the prices of items and foods. We have placed families in a position were they are forced to choose between the health / safety of their children. Especially in todays society where prices have been steadily rising.
Megan,
I thought about this a lot as a new parent. In the end, I thought advertisers were so misleading that the more expensive items weren’t really worth it. It had little to do with affordability–I mean, how can we ever trust advertisers? So many products on the market today are complete scams (or misrepresentations) that I just try to choose what works for me. As parents, we have to worry about harmful chemicals, harmful foods, toys that could hurt our kids, electronics that can ruin our kids minds and bodies–it’s honestly just too much. Then, because of advertisers, parents spend so much time judging other parents for their choices (just think of the great vaccination debate). How much does this play into moral panics? How much of it is driven by advertisers and the media? Why is the healthier option the more expensive option? How does this continue to lead to a more divided society? I think children as consumers leads to more questions instead of answering the ones we already have. Thanks for sharing!
Carrie
Hey Carrie,
I wrote the section on baby diapers and wanted to respond to your response. I agree that the choices new parents face can sometimes be “too much” like you said. However, the truth of the matter is, there are extreme levels of harmful materials in diapers/clothing/furniture, etc. And that puts another burden on new parents, who are already dealing with so much. I think advertisers exploit this a bit, like you said, but I find it to be more of an issue of mega corporations that are allowed to put harmful chemicals in diapers, than the advertisers themselves.
Trust me, as a new parent myself, the last thing I would want is to put a newborn in something that can permanently affect their endocrine system or cause cancer. It’s not much of a “conspiracy theory” to say that Republic-led states and legislators have been blocking regulation in this country for decades in the name of profit over safety and well-being.
Megan, Carrie, and Akiva, I want to mention a resource that might be of interest, in case you haven’t already seen it … “How To Choose Non-Toxic Diapers” on the Force of Nature website:
https://www.forceofnatureclean.com/how-to-choose-non-toxic-diapers/
It’s helpful to learn these details about fragrances, Tributyl-tin (TBT), and Sodium Polyacrylate (SAP). I’m guessing their top three top picks for non-toxic diaper brands are a bit on the pricey side.
While concerns about exposure to toxic chemicals are legitimate, opting to purchase the highest priced disposable diaper brand feels to me like part of a moral panic.
Pampers swaddlers, mentioned in the gallery as being suspicious due to their lack of packaging text about certain chemicals, do not actually contain latex or parabens. And calling fragrances “chemicals” feels to me like a marketing scare tactic. Everything on this planet is comprised of chemicals. There’s formaldehyde (a naturally occurring chemical) in apples and pears, and we give those to our babies to eat.
There is no such thing as a biodegradable, “chemical-free”, “natural”diaper. Producers and marketers use these terms as scare tactics to sell more, higher priced products. If they *really* cared, they would not be producing disposable diapers at all. These things are trashing our planet and will do far worse damage to people than dermal exposure to diaper materials ever will.
These links were not posted in my initial reply for some reason. Trying again…
there’s no such thing as a biodegradable diaper:
https://www.babylist.com/hello-baby/are-eco-friendly-diapers-better#:~:text=While%20there%20are%20some%20components,as%20a%20biodegradable%20disposable%20diaper.
and the Pampers Swaddlers materials:
https://www.pampers.com/en-us/baby/diapering/article/materials-and-safety
and lastly, recent peer-reviewed research finds that the risks of harm from disposable diaper chemical exposure are overestimated:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8998495/
Hi Megan,
Your comment about “healthy” food made me think of something. I have a friend who used to work for a company that packaged frozen fruits and vegetables. I think they did other things as well, but that’s the important part of this information. Anyway, this friend told me that they packaged for multiple companies, and that the same vegetables or fruits would go in the store brand and the name brand bags in many cases. That means that we are literally paying for a name in some cases. The name brand items often get pushed as healthier somehow. In this case, though, they’re exactly the same thing!
I’ve seen that as well, Kristi!
It’s interesting to me to watch my child demonstrate brand loyalty in the food aisles. Often it is for items that are exactly the same ingredients, but she feels that one brand is superior to another. How this is absorbed by young children is fascinating!
Hey Megan,
thanks for sharing these thoughts. I was thinking a lot about food this week, too- through the lens of consumerism obviously but also in terms of what families have access to or what they don’t. Of course price is a consideration of food- just like it is for diapers. Families may prioritize what is easier and cheaper in both scenarios. But another thought that occurred to me in the whole food/consumerism conversation is food deserts. I worked at a school in North Philly for 5 years and it was essentially in a food desert. I think that that is absolutely something to consider too! Families and people are facing rising food costs (rising living costs in general) everywhere, but families and children in certain areas are facing this additional hurdle, too.
nice post,
Lizzie
Thank you for this exhibit. I was struck by the chart that shows “Ages kids understand advertising”. Up to age 6 kids “can’t distinguish between ads and programs”. Up to age 8 kids “Don’t understand persuasive intent of Ads”. This is interesting. Up to age 8, children do not understand enough to make informed choices. They are easily persuaded. Mintz notes that “the private space of the home has been invaded from outside by forms of media and consumerism” (Mintz, 149), primarily by technology. This adds a new dimension (and has for many years now) to consumerism. Young children are exposed to more ways to consume. This exhibit notes that “The average American child watches an estimate between 25,000 to 40,000 television commercials per year.” This is a stunning statistic! Of course advertisers would appeal to children.
I also found it interesting that in recent years, according to Mintz, “more is spent on services and less on goods; and categories such as communications, leisure, holidays, and ‘culture’ have become proportionally more important.” (Mintz, 147) I have been thinking about how I spend my money and if this statement holds true for me. I likely do spend more on these other categories than on “goods”. It made me realize that I am “consuming” in a different way.
Marylynne,
I don’t know that kids still see “between 25,000 to 40,000 television commercials per year” since most parents don’t have cable TV anymore. I know if kids watch YouTube, then there are adds that play. All the ads here are in German and mostly about cleaning supplies, so it’s lost on my kids. haha If kids only watch TV on streaming services, which don’t always have ads, then are they appealing to children in any meaningful way? I’m not sure anymore. Thank you for sharing!
Carrie
Good point Carrie. I have the sense that kids are being targeted on other media now…on their phones and computers.
Hello Marylynne,
I posted the section regarding the visual. I thought it was very interesting to read! The website appears to potentially be biased, so some of the content in the visual makes sense. I thought it was eye-opening and would create conversation about the reality of it. If children are watching YouTube and their video cuts to an ad, they most certainly can tell the difference! So I thought that some content in the visual was fun to reflect on. Technology has really matured children. With that being said, I will also play devil’s advocate on myself and say that even before technology, children as young as age 6 most certainly knew if the program that they were watching on TV was being interrupted by a commercial. The rest of the facts on that visual I could see and agree with.
Marylynne,
I love that you include this quote from Mintz, “the private space of the home has been invaded from outside by forms of media and consumerism.” I’m sure it can feel that way the more we look into the prevalence of ads in our lives. As an adult, I can easily get sucked into an ad that pops up on my social media page. I go down the rabbit hole that brings me to an item I don’t need and was never thinking about needing. If we are easily influenced as adults, it can be expected that this will happen to our kids. As you mention, they may not be able to make informed decisions and detect the manipulation. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
Hi Marylynne,
You make some excellent points here. The thing that really stands out for me is the way you are consuming. It made me think of all the posts I see on social media around the holidays when parents don’t want people buying toys for their kids. They want experiences instead. And I get that it is more about lessening the amount of toys and junk in the house, but it also has this air of being less about consumerism, like somehow getting children an experience (amusement park tickets, movie tickets, zoo trips, etc.) makes one less of a consumer. They are actually equal in the consumer department; they just have different items attached.
-Think about how children obesity is different from our country compared to other countries and how marketing contributes to that
As I was creating my side exhibit this week, I thought a lot about childhood obesity in America. The author argues that this idea is part of a moral panic and may not be as serious as American media and health services makes it-it seems to sensationalized. However, there is a definite difference. In Germany, I rarely see overweight children, but the diet here is very fat and carb heavy. The big difference that I see is German children are outside all the time. They walk, they ride their bikes, they play soccer on village teams, and they do all this with minimal parental supervision. Kids are still allowed to go outside and play without constant supervision. It’s one of the things my kids love about being here. They are outside all the time–the Germans say there is no bad weather, only bad clothes. My kids definitely agree.
When we create panics about children going outside (because someone may take them), then parents keep their kids inside. How healthy is that as a society? If a child doesn’t get enough exercise, and thy eat unhealthy foods, then it to not only weight issues, but it leads to depression and anxiety for kids. I almost dread taking our kids back to the states where they won’t have as much freedom of movement. I do believe certain children do have legitimate medical issues that lead to obesity, but I think we do them a disservice when we just blame diet and exercise (which seems to be the primary issue today). Some children need medical intervention so they can lead long, healthy lives.
I will say this: the military is having an issue recruiting young Airmen because they don’t meet the height and weight requirements, nor can they pass a physical training test. Young adults also seems to have increased mental health and physical ailments that preclude them from serving. We have more issues with our young Airmen passing PT tests and suffering from mental health disorders. When I ask them what they do on their off time, they tell me they sleep or play video games. It’s hard to get them out of their rooms a lot of the time. I have to tell them everything should be balanced to include their diets, but they eat fast food and live sedentary lives much of the time. What do we do as a society to change these patterns? Can we do anything?
Hi Carrie,
I agree that diet is only partially to blame for childhood obesity. Children don’t go outside and play outdoors as they did years ago. I’m not so sure this is due to safety concerns or simply that it’s easier for parents to let their children sit in front of a screen. Poor diet, lack of exercise, and less time outdoors are all contributing factors for depression. It seems that we need to change these bad habits (more so for the parents, than the children) at a young age. Perhaps pediatricians need to play more of a role in helping parents establishing healthy choices for their children.
Hi Carrie,
Your point about the junk food panic and the moral panic over letting children play outside unattended brings up the idea of the cascade effect of moral panics. This is interesting to me because it presents a new way of viewing moral panics not as one-offs, but in their totality as a collective social phenomena. What if we viewed moral panics 1) across generations and 2) across themes within one time period. e.g. formula, GMOs, obesity, violence, etc all in a particular decade. it seems like there would be a lot of potential for new insights in this kind of investigation of moral panics and the creation of notions of childhood.
Carrie,
I agree that exercise is so important! It is amazing the difference in my body when I move vs. when I don’t for long periods of time. A body in motion stays in motion, right? Different geographic locations and cultures exercise differently. It doesn’t have to be heavy weights at the gym. It could be a walk downtown that involves going downhill and then uphill to get home. I do see that there is a lot of fear when it comes to letting children have too much freedom, but that is also part of getting them to make good decisions. Being the control freak that I am, I could see this being me (which isn’t necessarily a good thing)! Technology has contributed to this too. I see this in children and adults, myself included. Free time, relaxation time, and time for ourselves seem to turn more towards a television show or much-deserved scroll through Facebook. Modeling that to our kids may contribute to routine habits that aren’t helping the obesity epidemic.
Thanks for sharing!
Carrie,
I really enjoyed reading your post, and a lot of what you discussed resonated with me. I agree with your observation about children in Europe. During our visits to different places throughout Europe, my husband and I noticed many of the same things that you did. The food is healthier and fresher (I think I’ve only ever seen one fast food restaurant) and the children do play outside. In fact, I was just talking with a friend last night about this very topic. Many people walk, or bike, instead of driving. As a result, people seem healthier.
As for the mental health of our young men and women… I’ve noticed it too. It seems I’ve talked to so many people lately that say the same thing about their young adult children. I don’t know what exactly to blame it on. I think it has a lot to do with having a sedentary lifestyle and the phone (social media). It is disheartening to know that the military is having difficulty recruiting because of health requirements.
What an awesome exhibit! Your thought process is very easy to follow, which I appreciate.
As I was reading about “The Fear of Fat,” I immediately thought about my niece. My sister and brother-in-law are healthy people. They aren’t extreme, but they make sure that the food in the house is nutritional and that they don’t have a lot of unnecessary additives. My niece, who is seven, has received comments about her weight from other little girls in school. She has already started making negative comments about herself and judging her appearance. This is way too young to even have this as a momentary thought. While I believe parents need to be on top of their child’s nutrition to not aid in bad eating habits, I also believe that we have to remember kids are going through a lot of body changes. A child with some fat on them at seven or eight, may thin out as they grow. It devastates me to think that generations will be impacted by the presence of perfection with unrealistic standards of beauty starting at such a young age.
I also have been enjoying reading “The Material Child” since it has pushed me to ponder about children as consumers. As you say, commercials are marketed toward children with the thought in mind that they will say, “I want that!” In the argument of raising children in a commercial-free environment, I find this to be a very difficult feat since advertisements and commercials surround us. They are on our phones and social media, the television, local transportation like buses, bulletin boards, signs at the mall, etc. How do we avoid them? Would it be better to teach our children how to be responsible consumers so they are not being programmed to overspend on materials they do not need as adults?
Hi Melissa! I agree that we have to remember kids are going through a lot of body changes. With kids going through puberty at younger ages, I feel that doctors are not caught up and are somewhat causing this influence of watching children’s weights, in addition to peers at school. It made me sad to read about your niece making negative comments about herself. No seven year old should be having those thoughts! Especially with social media today, children are seeing advertisements all the time which then wants them to have that product simply just to have it. I agree that it would be better for adults to teach children how to be responsible consumers. This could potentially have a great impact on parents teaching their child a valuable lesson on life while saving money themselves.
Hey there Melissa! I appreciate you sharing the experiences your niece has been enduring at school. I agree that society and social media have begun tainting the minds of even our youngest generation. I think it is best to help her see all the beautiful things about herself and remind her that she is great the way she is. I find it admirable how you are so present in her life as she faces these difficult experiences at such a young age.
Hi Melissa. I would love to see more messages in advertising and in society that talk about health, strength, and physical activity. Strong isn’t usually stick thin. When we adopted our daughter at age three, she was extremely thin and lacked the muscles to even walk down an inclined surface (our driveway) without falling. I was determined to strengthen her legs with lots of walking and also hiking on uneven surfaces (mountain trails). She became an excellent hiker and developed strong leg muscles over time. This is an extreme example of going from no strength to having very strong muscles. But all children should be focusing on having strong healthy bodies–and enjoying the activity along the way. It isn’t necessarily about fat or thin, it should be about healthy and strong.
This was an amazing exhibit to read! As someone who does not currently have children but is aware of what is in children’s products, wow. I really found this section to be interesting. In addition, your section on chapter 6 The Fear of Fat made me think about my students at my school. I have seen that more of my students who are from different cultures (Hispanic, Asian, Middle-Eastern, etc.) are better with their eating habits compared to American students. It has been interesting having conversations with these students because they tell me that they eat healthy at home and have junk food in moderation and not every day. Whereas my American students do not touch their fruit or vegetables at lunch simply because “it is not what they want.”
From personal experience, I did softball for 13 years of my life. I was skinny, yet muscular due to being a pitcher. Every year, my pediatrician would tell me “you are too skinny, let’s up your calories.” I would do that then the following year it was “let’s put you on a diet.” This led to me watching how much I ate and now looking back, I did restrict myself from time to time because it’s what my doctor put in my head. Now that I look back in photos, I have no idea why she did that. I remained the same weight with fluctuation throughout the year when I was not in season. My last year at the pediatrician, I did gain several pounds (I started college, eating more protein, etc) I was told I was overweight and felt belittled. I gave up. Immediately after this experience, I switched to my primary care physician, where I shared these thoughts with him. He told me “I am not concerned about your weight. You are a healthy 21 year old who is still going to have fluctuations from time to time.” Overall, from this experience, I have learned that weight is just a number and if you do the right things for yourself, your mental health, and your body, weight is not a critical aspect.
I cannot even imagine how children must look at their weight. With social media, sports, and movies/tv shows, could this impact children today? Is there anything we can do to change these patterns before it’s too late?
Hey there Kelcey! I found it interesting how students with differing demographics in your classroom have different diet regimens. That was a neat example to include. Also, I appreciate you sharing the poor experience you had with your doctor. I regret their decision to make you feel like you were doing something wrong or being belittled by others, yet I am glad that you have chosen to use this bad experience to empower yourself!
Kelcey,
You bring up some excellent questions regarding weight and childhood. I too have lived a similar experience as you had during my anual visits to the pediatrician, and yes, I too felt incredibly insecure in my body upon leaving that office each and every time. To answer your first question, I think there is a lot of media being spread to children that weight is just a number and that we should celebrate all body types, but I also feel that society will never truly move past the issue with weight and body image strictly because standards constantly change so we can never quite fit the ideal image. As a child, that it’s a hard pill to swallow but I think if we keep embracing weight and body types the way we have been recently, there will be less of a stigma behind weight.
Great exhibit! I was really fascinated by the discussion about diapers and baby formula. It is no wonder that lower-income families struggle so much. Your exhibit demonstrates how inequitable our economy is and how it favors those who have the means to purchase higher priced items. When my children were babies, organic diapers and baby food did not exist so I am not only amazed at the difference in price, but also in the quality of the items. If you want healthy, you have to pay for it. This also holds true for the food industry. Lower-income families struggle to put fresh fruits and vegetables, as well as healthier foods on the table because they are too expensive. As your exhibit points out, fast food is cheaper, but so are processed foods found in the grocery store. Unfortunately, these are the types of foods many families gravitate toward because they are more affordable. The real shame is that consumption of these foods leads to obesity and other health issues for children. That’s why it is important for school lunches to be healthy and expose children to new kinds of foods, so that they can learn to make better food choices.
Hi Beth,
Your comment about school lunches resonated with me. Our school provides many students with free and reduced breakfast and lunch. I am always bothered when they return to eat their breakfast with a Rice Krispies treat or a cinnamon bun, and when the options for lunch are pizza or cereal “grab and go.” Where is the protein?! For families who can afford to pack their children’s lunches, there are options to provide and insist on healthy food (or at least a balance!). For families who rely on the free meals at school, unhealthy food seems to be the norm. I would love to see more variety and exposure to healthier foods. I know kids can be “picky” sometimes, but in my school, it really feels like no one is even trying to be healthy.
Thanks for making that connection from the reading!
Cara
Cara, so many of the breakfasts and lunches at my school are those HFSS processed foods mentioned in Buckingham. Yes, they offer healthier options like fruits and veggies, but the children rarely take them because they are used to the processed foods. If they don’t learn to eat healthy at home, they are not likely going to choose the healthy foods at school.
Hey Beth, thank you for your comment. I wrote the section on baby diapers and my intention was to highlight the health disparities faced by the privileged vs. the masses. I always think about how someone like Kim Kardashian can simply purchase organic clothing and diapers without additives without even thinking about it. Meanwhile, I’m over here with my new babies trying to budget an Oko-tek certified mattress for my kid and calculating how many hours overtime I need to work instead of spending time with my babies, to afford it.
Hi Beth, I am the curator who discussed baby formula and I appreciate your insight into these products when your kids were young enough to partake. Thank you for adding that context to our discussion!
So many things come to mind after reading through this exhibit (well done, by the way)
.
1) Our society focuses on food, and it is often tied to emotions. Birthday party? Have cake and ice cream. Holiday gathering? Have a huge feast. Get a promotion at work? Go out to dinner to celebrate. Something getting you down? Eat comfort food. Have a new neighbor? Bake them cookies. Long day? Order out. But we can’t just focus on changing food habits, we have to increase activity levels. Many of my students will tell me all they do when they get home from school is play video games.
2) I’ve seen a difference in my niece and nephew with regard to susceptibility to commercials. When they were younger (around 3-8 years old) they wanted everything they saw on TV or in the mailers that came to the house. As they grew up and started developing their own identities (they are now 11 and 14), their desires seem based more upon what their peers have.
3) “From the moment they are born, children today are already consumers” (Buckingham, 2011, p. 5). I would disagree. At birth, children don’t have a choice in what their parents provide, so I’m not sure I would consider them true “consumers.” Once they understand and can convey what they like/dislike/want/need, consumerism begins, but most of the power still lies in the hands of the parent as the purchaser. As they start to earn their own money (allowance, part-time jobs), they most definitely are consumers.
Hi, Diane! I really enjoyed reading your reflection. Food is such an interesting topic. I have found the older I get there are some people that basically eat to stay alive and view it as a task they need to check off. On the other side, there are people that eat as an event or activity. It is something they enjoy, celebrate, and carve time out for. In this exhibit however, discusses food in a different way. Like you mentioned, in a societal view we see food for different purposes, or all purposes. To add to your list of different times we eat food, I was thinking during a movie, eat candy or popcorn. During classroom holidays, bring cookies, candy, valentine’s, etc. Even our typical view of a date could be associated with dinner/a meal. There are so many activities that revolve around food. And this is all before seeing all of the advertisements for establishments like billboards and commercials. So interesting!
Hi Diane,
Your 2nd and 3rd points about both about the section that I curated. I thought this was a really fun topic this week and love how it creates so much conversation! Your 2nd point makes me think about how much times have changed in regard to society! I feel like this holds true no matter what the decade is or what type of advertising there is. I think once children are “used” to the commercials and understand a tid bit of reality, they are no longer falling for it. In response to your third point, I was hoping that by posting this, someone would disagree!
Hi Diane, I think that your observation about the social situated-ness of food is a good point to bring up. This is a similar issue that people face with drugs and alcohol. These behaviors are linked to particular social situations that an individual might enjoy, so it is difficult to enjoy one without the other.
When it comes to children and the high obesity rate we have here in the United States, I think most of the blame falls on the parents. Children are only consuming, for the most part, what their parents are purchasing and putting in front of the child. A lot of those choices that parents make come down to dollars and cents. For example, in today’s world, a healthy option such as a salad costs an average of $1.50 more than the unhealthy counterpart of, for example, a burger. With the uprise in living expenses, parents are more likely to choose the cheaper option. A final component is time. It takes little to no time to get a quick meal from a fast food place verses a homecooked meal. I mean….it’s called fast for a reason. I think in order to make healthy changes in children’s lives we need to start making changes as a society. Other countries do this, so we should start thinking about following suit.
Hi Lilyanna,
I agree with your point about time as an obstacle. There should be more support for working parents in providing healthy options to eat and to exercise that do not cost an arm and a leg. I think about meal kits like Hello Fresh – they are so expensive, and I have only ever used meal kits for my husband and I. I shudder to think about the cost of providing enough healthy food to eat for the whole family.
Cara, even as an adult there are weeks that I am crunched for time and it’s easy to reach for the unhealthier stuff. I actually use the meal kits from Hungryroot every so often, mostly due to expense, but I try to choose the quick & healthy recipes.
Lily, your comment brings to my mind a piece by Caitlin See titled “The Cost of Healthy Eating Vs. Unhealthy Eating”:
https://plutusfoundation.org/2020/healthy-eating-budget/
Here’s a brief excerpt:
“Unhealthy food choices tend to be cheaper. A comprehensive review of 27 studies in 10 countries found that unhealthy food is about $1.50 cheaper per day than healthy food. If you’re feeding a large family, it may cost less to simply buy from the dollar menu or purchase cheap premade frozen dinners.”
And here’s the link to the comprehensive review:
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/3/12/e004277
Hi Lilyanna, I agree that the parents are to blame, but I think that corporations hold more of the moral blame since they are the ones pushing unhealthy lifestyles in the first place. Beyond that, I think we must consider the extent that children are complicit.
I really enjoyed this topic in the readings and module. As I was reading through the exhibit, I aligned with so many thoughts that the curators had! Mainly, “The Material Child Chapter 1: Exploited or Empowered?”, really allowed me to reflect upon what toys I grew up on and how they influenced some of my views of childhood. The conclusion that these particular toys had commercials is something I do not feel we see much of today. There used to be so many commercials, product advertising, and talk around certain toys. I also was thinking how we would see certain products subtly advertised in shows or movies. Another element that made me think of this was going into certain stores. For example, if you would go into Boscov’s, there is a whole section that would say “As seen on TV”. I remember there would be toys, Snuggies, random inventions, etc. This seems to be something that “went out of style” as the years went on. While that aspect went away, a newer way of advertising came at kids through apps and games on iPads and other technology devices. This module of children being the consumers forced me to view some of these topics in a new light and realize just how geared advertisements are to kids.
Hi Antonia, I’m one of the curators this week and I also remember the “As Seen on TV” section at stores like Bed, Bath, and Beyond and Target. Today’s marketing is digital, as you said, and I think it is aimed more directly at kids with less direct connection to parents. This is a great addition to our discussion and helps me think about differences in advertising across time!
Antonia,
I was the curator for this section. It was a fun section and the content/point I was trying to make was endless! Like you stated about the “newer age” regarding technology, I really wanted to tap into that and do a compare/contrast! I could have went on and on about it. I decided to keep it “retro”. I do agree with your comment about how commercials surrounding toys have faded. I do not have cable, nor do I have children, but commercials really aren’t showing toys unless you are specifically watching a kid-friendly channel. I remember back then, it didn’t matter what type of channel you were watching, toy commercials were on every channel.
Hi group C!
First of all, great exhibit! You guys really pulled together so many aspects of childhood consumer culture in an easy-to-follow way. I particularly appreciate your diaper example and questions. When I had my first (24+ years ago), I was struggling financially. I used the cheapest diapers available for my son because it was all I could afford. Looking back, I wonder how many chemicals were against his body daily for over two years. And it makes me wonder why we can’t make safer diapers available to everyone, regardless of income. Fast forward to my fourth and I had learned a lot about diapers and chemicals. I decided that we would cloth diaper him. It was an expensive initial investment, but it paid off financially and health-wise. Plus, cloth diapers these days are cute!
The other thing I really wanted to talk about from your exhibit is the childhood obesity section. As a kid, I remember having a unit on advertisements in elementary school. We watched commercials and then learned what they were really saying and not saying. Some of those commercials included the ones for sugary breakfast cereals. The ads always said “PART of a nutritional breakfast” and featured a bunch of other things one would need to eat to make it a complete breakfast. But kids often don’t know that stuff. Parents often don’t know. And even when they do, they often can’t afford better or don’t have time for better. Eating sugar for breakfast really just starts the day off in a tough place and contributes to childhood obesity. This also makes me think about the issue of fast food being so affordable for working parents versus the fruits and vegetables and healthier cuts of meat (I hesitate to use words like “better” and “healthier” as I think it creates an unnecessary issue with food and really feeds into the harmful diet culture we have all grown up in)
I know that was a bit disjointed. Hopefully it can be followed! I look forward to reading others’ comments and seeing how everyone else interpreted and digested this exhibit.
Kristi, glad to meet another cloth diaper-er! I’m glad you appreciated the section I wrote regarding diapers. When I had my first, I made it with cloth diapering until my baby started eating solids and I simply could not do it anymore, and switched to ‘Dyper’ brand (shown above). It’s absolutely crazy to think about the toxins in newborn diapers of all things, considering how brand-new and fragile they are right after birth. It blows my mind how Pampers say “#1 choice of hospital nurses and staff” because they are a horrible choice! I still remember after switching from cloth diapers to disposable ones, the first time I put my baby in a disposable diaper, his butt was stained blue from the artificial dyes in the diaper and I thought “why are there dyes in diapers in the first place??!”
Akiva,
It was so eye-opening to me when I started researching cloth diapers! I had no idea the number of chemicals in the disposables. It’s been 12 years since I used a diaper at this point (my youngest is 14, turning 15 soon). I am not in the loop anymore on what is happening in the diaper world. So, this was interesting to read.
Great exhibit! When reading it through, I was most struck by the idea of exploitation vs empowerment. Ya’ll wrote “By actively using children to sell products to children, is that empowering the child, or exploiting their nature?”. this question caused me to really reflect on some of the toys I played with as well as what I see kids playing with today. There are definitely toys/consumer products that empower kids- when I was younger I loved art sets, and this awakened a lasting interest. I also loved soccer and basketball and swimming, and many of my toys/gifts were athletic. I also loved reading and was often given books. I feel like those gifts or toys were very empowering for me. And additionally while I didn’t really have this experience personally, there were toy science kits and stem activities and such. The reason that this becomes problematic isn’t that kids consume- the problem lies in the volume of that consumption. Adults fall victim here too to over consumption, too. When consumption occurs at a more modest rate, it’s empowering. But when it occurs at the rate at which we see, I think if i had to choose between exploitation or empowerment, I’d probably say exploitation.
I am intrigued by the section on disposable diapers because it presents a type of conundrum that appears in many consumer goods. I argue that the concerns about exposure to chemicals on the individual level are not statically significant, but the larger concern is the global environmental impact of these goods.
The idea that objects we use are full of harmful chemicals is:
1) just accurate, as the entire world and everything in it is comprised of chemicals, which in varying doses of exposure range from benign to lethal
2) fear inducing as there is a very real concern about how our bodies absorb chemicals, especially brand new little bodies
Marketers use our concerns and fears to push “natural” products and generate revenue for their manufacturers’ stockholders. Manufacturers and marketers know that consumers have a strong reaction to words like formaldehyde, because obviously we don’t want our babies to be exposed to formaldehyde, but that’s actually a “natural”, naturally occurring chemical that is in lots of things we eat like bananas and pears and chicken.
Recent research on the issue of toxic chemicals in diapers shows that risk of hazards via skin exposure to chemicals in diapers is overestimated
While the individual concerns about hazards are intense and immediate, whether they are scientifically significant or not, the more critical concerns about disposable diapers are on the global level, as the environmental impacts of production and disposal of diapers pose risks of catastrophic losses at the population level.
I found this exhibit to be engaging because I find the ethics of obesity to be very interesting. First we must ask if it is ethical to question if obesity is an issue in the first place. Positions from groups like the Fat acceptance movement would maintain that there is nothing wrong with obesity. On the other hand, there is a clear correlation between obesity and illness. The discussion of laws being politically motivated rather than scientifically motivated was intriguing. Companies clearly stand to profit from getting children hooked on sugary products at a young age.
John, I hear what you’re saying when you ask if it’s ethical to question obesity. I don’t think it is okay to judge people because of their obesity. However, I do think we should educate children on healthy eating because, as you point out, obesity does cause many health issues. Diabetes and heart disease are two of the most devastating illnesses caused by obesity. The fast food industry has helped to create a society of unhealthy eating habits, which lead to increased medical costs.
Great job on this exhibition!! Your section on diapers really put into perspective how costs quickly add up, and how people pay a premium for healthy choices. Something that came to mind while I was reading Buckingham this week was food stamps. In Chapter 6, Buckingham talked about the social inequity of American society setting up people of lower income for less healthy diets and more sedentary lifestyles. Food stamps is a prime example of this inequity. People who rely on food stamps have historically had fewer healthy choices — shelf-stable options (with preservatives) were included, while many fresh foods were excluded. It sounds like the USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP – what the food stamps program is called) has made some efforts at remediating this (https://snaped.fns.usda.gov/), but hopefully a trend in a healthier direction continues.
Another aspect of class awareness that struck me from the reading this week was when Buckingham stated, “Lurking behind these judgements are further prejudices about taste and cultural value. Commercial marketing is acceptable, it would seem, if it promotes products that are ‘healthy’ or ‘wholesome’, but not if it relates to things that the authors deem to be harmful.” Certainly, signing your child up for ballet classes is far more expensive than buying the trendiest bracelet-maker or video game. However, since ballet classes are considered wholesome, they would be deemed a justified expense, instead of mindless consumerism. The difference comes down to a moral judgment, not a financial one. This is so interesting to me. I was telling my husband about this idea and he told me that when he was growing up, his parents said they had a limit on how much they would spend on toys in a given month, but that they had an unlimited budget for books. It is a prime example of the moral judgment behind child-driven consumer choices as well as class privilege of being able to afford lots of books. (Let’s not forget about the library, people!!!)