Television advertisements aimed at children consumers started in 1952, with the first ever toy commercial featuring Mr. Potato Head. The original Mr. Potato Head commercial shows a version of the toy that lacks the familiar plastic potato body, as at that time the stick-on accessories were intended to be put on an actual potato! Across the coming decades, television commercials geared toward children focused not only on toys, but also on health and beauty products, social events, television/media, and food and beverages.
This gallery contains just a few examples of the various forms commercials have taken over the years. As you watch the commercials, consider how Buckingham describes the interplay of consumerism and formation of sense of identity. Buckingham says that “consumer culture is seen to provide symbolic resources that people use to communicate and make meaning, and thereby to signify or make claims about their identity” (p. 167). What can we observe about the material and symbolic “resources” shown in these commercials and how might these materials have been used by children and parents as they made claims about their identities in these time periods?
Advertisement Example from the 1960s – Beauty Products
If you spend much time around tween girls, you are probably aware of the current skin care craze. These days, it’s not totally unusual for middle-class ten- and eleven-year olds to be “obsessed” with things like ceramides or hyaluronic acid. While the current trend is fascinating because it seems that there is not one single product driving this fad, but rather it is the practice of skin care routines itself that has been popularized on social media. But, what’s even more interesting is that this is not new! This commercial from 1964 might be one of the earliest examples of beauty products designed for children that were advertised as a way for children to engage in adult-like behavior. In this example, this product is described as the right thing to use when getting ready for a special night out, like prom, but is shown being used by children who are several years away from actually participating in that kind of social event.
Advertisement Example from the 1980s – Toys
Today there are more options for baby gear and accessories than ever before in the course of human history. While grand claims like that are usually inaccurate, a quick glance through online baby registry options reveals that this grand claim stands the test of scrutiny. Lively debates ensue about whether all this gear is necessary or not, but this 1984 Cabbage Patch Commercial might give some insight into the purchasing habits of today’s new parents. Were, perhaps, the desires for extensive baby gear instilled in today’s parents while they were children? Does having had, or longed to have, the table mates high chair, travel bag, musical swing, and three-in-one pram for your Cabbage Patch Kid prime an adult to look for those items once again when they have real children to care for?
Beyond wondering about the potential for this kind of object affinity being developed during childhood and then enacted in adulthood, this commercial prompts another interesting inquiry. It displays a really specific illustration of the lifestyle of a particular social class. The featured actors in the ad are children who take their dolls along as they dine in table service restaurants, engage in travel and leisure, and visit relatives who live in large homes with finely manicured lawns. What does that tell us about who the manufacturer and advertisers see as their target audience? And, does that image actually match the lifestyle and spending habits of their primary consumers? What are the impacts of this kind of “selling” of a social class’ lifestyle to consumers who are largely outside of that social class?
Advertisement Example from the 2000s – Television Media
In Chapter Six of David Buckingham’s The Material Child, he debunks popular ideas around the influence of advertising on rising levels of childhood obesity in the early 2000’s. There was a moral panic about more children than ever before being overweight and obese. Many people blamed the television media. They believed the media had immense power in their ability to encourage children to consume foods which were high in fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS). Below is an example of an HFSS ad from 2005 which was for Burger King and targeted at children who would be interested in Star Wars and collecting Star Wars toys.
Buckingham reviewed the research surrounding the connection and found that there is insufficient proof that advertising for HFSS foods increases childhood obesity. On the contrary, Buckingham argues that the political outcry against TV media is a calculated distraction from taking meaningful action against the true causes of childhood obesity, which are deeply rooted in American socioeconomic conditions. Buckingham states, “The key issue here is that of social inequality – of people’s unequal access both to food itself and to opportunities for physical exercise.” (Buckingham, D., 2011, p123)
While advertising did tend to influence children’s preferences towards certain brands over others (for example, Burger King over McDonald’s), there is no evidence that restricting HFSS advertising has reduced obesity. Can you think of other consumerist moral panics which politicians have co-opted in order to appear that they are “doing something?”
Advertisement Example from the 2010s – Social Events
Chuck E. Cheese was a popular arcade-like child environment in the decades of the 2000s and 2010s. This location was typically rented for birthday parties, weekend activities, and “play-dates”. On January 18, 2015, Chuck E. Cheese put out this particular commercial that talks about “doing the Chuck E.”. This was supposedly a dance move that became well-known for kids. In the reading by David Buckingham, it is said, “[…] such products were seen to expose children prematurely to undesirable aspects of adult life, and thence to exert a corrupting influence on adults as well” (Buckingham 2011). This relates to the commercial because one sees a few different elements. First, we see in the beginning tickets being thrown in the air and marketing phrases relating to a monetary value. One conclusion could be this is a scene that looks like an “adult” casino. Kids are collecting tickets, throwing around the tickets, and then able to use the tickets to continue playing and being a part of the experience. Another angle to look at this situation is the idea that kids are dancing for the tickets. “Doing the Chuck E.” is the dance move that “wins” kids tickets. If we take more of a cynical or “devil’s advocate” approach, this is like having kids dance for money (in the form of tickets). Another aspect from the reading is, “For others, innocence meant play untroubled by concerns about the adult world […]” (Buckingham 2011). The elements that concern the adult world are the casino setting (that is passed off as an arcade) and a small introduction to the concepts of gambling (relating to the tickets, accumulating more to play more). The final point relating to this commercial is the experience and atmosphere this presents. Going to Chuck E. Cheese, dancing on a dance floor, fun dance lights, loud music, arcade games, winning tickets, etc. appeals to the child and forces the child to be the consumer because they will want to become the kids in the commercial. Through the eyes of the child, this looks like a fun place to be, the kids look like they are having fun, so therefore I want someone to take me here to have fun.
Advertisement Example from the 2020s – Food and Beverages
On February 13, 2022, Liquid Death, a water drink came out with a new commercial with children front and centered. Back in 2007, “there was a total ban on the advertisement of food and drink that is high in fat, salt, and sugar” (Buckingham, 104), so Liquid Death and its advertisement of 100% mountain water from the Alps seemed to fit right along with what we wanted children to put into their body. What the marketing department did wrong was their approach to this advertisement. Within the 30-second commercial children are seen “cracking open a cold one” and acting like drunk adults throwing a party, drawing on each other’s faces, shouting, and seemingly passing out. This approach to advertisement is “emulating the style of older peers” (Buckingham, 77). Children are not acting like children, but rather like drunk adults. Water is a necessity and should be advertised in a more natural, encouraging manner than filled with rage, angst, and rebellion. Advertisements like this are causing the “boundaries between childhood, youth, and adulthood to be progressively eroded” (Buckingham, 10).
Across the decades, television commercials aimed at child consumers have become more elaborate and covered goods and services other than just toys. Compared to current television advertisements, what else has changed and what has remained the same?
How has this type of material resource, the television advertisement, been used by children and adults for their own purposes of making claims to their individual and group identities?
References:
Buckingham, D. (2011). The Material Child : Growing up in consumer culture. Polity Press.
Curator: Yassah Fello
Great Exhibit!!
Children are more vulnerable to advertisement as compared to adults. They are unable to assess good and bad information. They tend to model exactly what they see whether it is negative or positive behaviors. It is important to engage children into educational activities that will distract them from advertisements. Moreover, parents need to behave as positive role models in order to assist their children in becoming great leaders.
Thank you for this side exposition! The Liquid Death commercial was shocking! Not only is the ad not suitable for children, but the can itself is inappropriate. The makers are intentionally making it look like a beer can. I guess this is their attempt to make water “cool” to drink. I’m hoping the children viewers are wiser than the adults who made this product and realize that’s not “cool!” I wish there was some type of code of conduct for advertising to youth… or perhaps to everyone.
Hi Karen,
I’m one of the curators for this gallery. I agree about the artwork on the can. I’ve seen this item in the store and been put off by the name and the design. I thought it was some kind of super caffeinated energy drink and never took another look at it!
Team,
The ads above are new to me. Chuck E Cheese has been around since I was a kid, but the commercials were definitely not that exciting. They usually had terrifying animatronics in them. I always thought it was strange that a rat was the mascot for a pizza joint/arcade, but maybe not. They are still around.
Your second ad was crazy–they definitely made it look like kids were having a rager party, and they were all intoxicated. I’m sure that ad won’t lead to future binge drinking issues. I appreciate they are trying to get kids to drink water, but glorifying alcohol use probably shouldn’t be the way to go about it. It reminds me of the candy cigarettes and bug chew gum we had when I was a kid. Super gross.
Thank you for sharing, and it goes to show that when advertisers can use bad adult behavior to influence children, they will. I also think this goes back to Buckingham’s claim that advertisers try to appeal to parent’s nostalgia when selling to children. The second ad could be a call to parents to remember their young, fun college days and buy the water for their kids to relive that time. It’s still super weird.
Carrie
I don’t know about you, Carrie, but I grew up in the 1980s and Chuck E. Cheese was dark and grimy and it totally felt like a nightclub… and as an 8 year old that’s what I loved that about it! You went in there, ditched your parents, and ran around under the cover of strobe lights and blaring music. It was magical.
Now it’s bright, and well monitored, and hyper sanitized. I get no kind of nostalgia at all when I take my child there! Ha! My child has a great time there, but she doesn’t know the sense of freedom that’s missing from this new, clean Chuck E. Cheese.
Hi Deanna!
I grew up in the early 2000’s and I can say that Chuck E. Cheese was fun and well monitored. It was where kids my age had their birthday parties. Over the years I have heard that it slowly was not being sanitized as often as it should me. A co-worker of mine just took her grandchildren there and unfortunately, they got covid from playing in the play area.
Hi, Carrie! I wrote about the Chuck E. Cheese ad and I completely agree! There would be commercials while I was growing up about how fun and exciting it was there. I was never allowed to go unless it was for someone else’s birthday party. The atmosphere was not one my parents wanted me around on a regular basis. While I was researching for this side exhibit, I was actually shocked that Chuck E. Cheese was still in business in some places!
Wonderful side exhibit! I am completely appalled by the Liquid Death commercial – I had never seen it before your posting. I am confused at how a brand thinks it is appropriate to portray children (especially significantly underage children) as getting intoxicated, drunk and passing out from drinking. It just isn’t cool at all. I went along time without knowing this was water because I was so confused why it would be in a can with a logo that looked just like beer. It was finally at work one day that someone was drinking it and I learned it was just canned water. I understand the whole concept of reducing plastic, but it exactly mimics a can of beer with a logo and name that also allude to beer / alcohol not water. It would be interesting to see statistics of how this commercial did with the public!
Hi everyone!
I really enjoyed reading this exhibit! The Liquid Death commercial left me jaw dropped. The can looks like a tall boy alcohol can, the pregnant woman drinking it, the girl sleeping with the can in her hand. If you do not know it is mountain water, you really could think that it’s alcohol. Granted it is water but the way the company made this commercial.. I think it’s completely inappropriate. Now, do companies today have advertisements that may cause controversy? Yes. But this commercial… I was not a fan of at all. Megan, I do agree with you on how this commercial did with the public.
Hi! I wrote about the Liquid Death commercial and when I was in the researching stage for this side exhibit I reacted the same way. I really thought it was a beer commercial until the end. I even ended up looking up the company to make sure I wasn’t losing my mind!
This exhibit did a really good job of emphasizing the impact of television and advertising on society. The liquid death commercial really stood out to me. I think that commercials like these are testing the boundaries between humor and being politically correct. Although I can see where the misinterpretation between commercials like these and youth come together, I also feel that society has become to ridged. I think that humor is being seen less and less today due to the fear of others reactions. I think that if things become too serious than it will still make kids act out and make poor choices due to the strictness and forbiddance of society. It is the very ideals that create a “rebel”. Personally, I think that kids need to be exposed to both humor and seriousness. A common balance is one way that I think kids today can flourish.
Hey all- great side exhibit!!
I’ve never actually seen that Liquid Death commercial- probably because I always watch tv on streaming sites where they play the same commericals over and over again lol!
I’d heard from people that Liquid Death looks like that because it was originally made to be sold at concerts/music festivals/etc where many people were drinking, so something marketable to compare to those drinks for people who weren’t. Something to hold. But I have no idea if that’s true or intended, or just something I’ve heard! That being said, that speaks to the theme of the commerical- but doesn’t make sense in the context of children. The company was probably going for a laugh here- but I wonder if it got pulled for negative reactions/backlash.
Your exhibit was especially great to me because it spans such a wide length of time, and it as really interesting to see how advertisement trends play out and impact children.
Something that strikes me while reading your side exhibit is how much advertisements have changed over the years. Ads are now more flashy, loud, and in-your-face as it were. To answer the prompts at the start of this side exhibit, I think the connection between all the ads is how much they play into identity by helping kids seem “cool” or “with it” with a certain product. The ‘Star Wars’ ad in particular jumps right in with a light saber, and the inner-child in myself is thinking “woah! I want whatever product that is!”
Thanks for this great exhibit. I, too, am appalled by the Liquid Death commercial.
On another note, I have to push back on a quote by Buckingham. Buckingham states, “The key issue here is that of social inequality – of people’s unequal access both to food itself and to opportunities for physical exercise.” (Buckingham, D., 201) I do not believe that “social inequality” and “unequal access both to food…and to opportunities for physical exercise” are the main causes of obesity. I did not have a lot of money growing up. This mainly meant that my mother made our meals from scratch because it cost less, we didn’t have lots of sugary/fatty snacks, and we did not go to fast food restaurants. We simply didn’t have the money. We were very physically active, playing outside for hours and hours each day. This did not cost money. Today, even if there is not a lot of money, people likely still have an expensive cell phone. This type of expensive item would have been completely out of range for me as a child. Now our society places priorities on different things, possibly influenced by media and advertisers. As consumers, we think we must have things that were luxuries in the past–big TVs, certain clothes or shoes in the latest styles, the latest gadgets, the latest phones, etc. We are more focused on convenience and timer-saver items (fast food, processed foods, gadgets, appliances, etc.) It is a way of thinking. So much of today’s entertainment is sedentary and screen-based. But it typically costs money for that screen and doesn’t eliminate the fact that children could still be physically active without paying money to do so. It is much more complicated than simply saying there is not enough money for good food or opportunities for exercise.
This is really dependent upon geography as well, though. Not all children live in places where there are safe outdoor spaces to play. Where I grew up, there was a playground, but it was not a place where children could set foot safely. Waking down the street is not always an accessible exercise option, especially for children living in places with intense poverty.
In addition to issues like lack of green space/play space in neighborhoods, and food deserts (neighborhoods without proper grocery stores), food insecurity also influences food selection in stores. When you consider the calorie-per-dollar ratio, buying hot dogs makes more sense than buying broccoli.
Deanna, I agree that geography plays a role, adding further to the complexity of the issue. However, not all people who would be considered living in poverty have the same circumstances or make the same choices. I have a friend who until this year (she found a better job) would have been considered living in poverty. She had very limited funds. She lived in a small basement apartment. Her son did not have a phone (a luxury that was too expensive). etc… But she insisted on an extremely healthy diet. Neither she nor her son are obese. I think she may not be the norm, but she is an example of how choice and knowledge play a role in diet and health, even if you lack money. I do think that knowledge about health plays a role. I think it is more complex than making a blanket statement like “social inequality” is the cause of obesity.
It is important to note, though, that social inequality is not an external or debatable factor, as the air quotes “social inequality” seems to indicate.
The hallmark feature of our social system is social inequality. The social structure in which we all live is an inequitable one, and it is within this structure that all of our decisions and actions take place.
So while social inequality is not the only reason, it is an ever present one.
As I was watching that Liquid Death commercial I was thinking “Oh My God…seriously??” Everything about it was awful! The kids behaviors, the design of the can, the music saying “breaking the law”…whoever thought of this should be fired. On another note, I was a young teenager when Cabbage Patch kids came out but I don’t remember all of those accessories. As for the Barbie bubble bath, it was more adult-like than I expected for the 1960s with the references to a glamorous date with Ken. I did wonder though why they kept saying “it’s real.”
I found this exhibit to be very interesting. It is compelling to look at advertisements diachronically to notice how attitudes and mores in regards to children have changed, or possibly remained stable, over time.
What a great exhibit! I like how you focused your exhibit on how commercials depict children acting more like adults. I particularly found the link to the skin care clip fascinating. It is amazing how young girls have gotten caught up in make-up and skin care. I think when I was younger, we played in our mom’s make-up, but we were never allowed to wear it outside the home. Nowadays, girls as young as eight years old are wearing make-up to school. The video clip now sheds more light on the fact that they are now doing a whole “beauty regimen” to boot!
The last video was shocking. I mean, you sort of have this understanding that it’s kids having fun while drinking the product. However, it is the way it is presented. The viewer didn’t realize it was even water until the very end – after the shocking end when the pregnant mother chugged it down. It makes the point, that the boundaries between childhood and adult are disappearing.
You guys did a great job with this side exhibit! I thought it flowed nicely and I really enjoyed it! I did the section of commercials for the main exhibit. I think this ties in nicely with my section in the main exhibit. A lot of these commercials are very eye opening regarding what was “acceptable” for a commercial back then versus what is “acceptable” now. I often wonder if people had issues with these “unacceptable” commercials back then but did not really have a means to express their concerns due to not having social media like one would do now.
Hi Deanna, Cara, Lily, and Antonina! Your choices of artifacts and readings of them are thought provoking. It’s fascinating to see the “coolness” factor that connects having the product with belonging and happiness.
And I’m joining the chorus of voices commenting on the Liquid Death commercial and product! Wow, I’ve never heard of this before, and I’ll confess I find the name (quite a font selection!) and idea a bit chilling. It’s got a strong brand identity for sure (and I’ve seen comments along these lines in a Forbes piece), but what is it teaching? Embracing this product feels like a dare. Btw, in checking out the website (https://liquiddeath.com/collections/beverages), it’s interesting to see how the daredevil identity carries through in product choices (e.g., Berry It Alive). And I find this quite over the top … one of the navigation choices on the website, right next to “About,” is “Sell Your Soul.” What?! I don’t even want to click on this one! It’s an interesting mix of environmental consciousness and fearless boldness.
Kevin Roose’s “I Was Skeptical of Baby Gear. Then I Became a Dad” is a lot of fun to read. Here’s a quote that I think speaks to the benefits of learning about baby gear:
“Since our son’s birth, I’ve found that my interest in his gear has made me a better, more capable parent. I can field his pediatrician’s questions about formula types and nipple sizes without breaking a sweat, and I know exactly how many diapers to pack for a three-day trip” (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/14/technology/baby-gear-tech.html).
It’s amazing to see these artifacts you’ve selected and presented through the decades. I appreciate your insights and connections with Buckingham’s text, too.
Thanks for your engaging and informative exhibit!