Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Disney's PR Strategy Unhealthy for 'Little Consumers'

By Michele Simon, AlterNet. Posted October 19, 2006.


Disney says it's concerned about kids' eating habits. But the company can't turn down the huge profits associated with helping junk-food companies market to children.
101906story
101906story

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Why Are We Locking Up Traumatized Veterans for Their Addictions Instead of Offering Them Treatment?
Penny Coleman

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh Stoking GOP Civil War
Eric Boehlert

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson

Rights and Liberties:
Hard to Believe: 73 U.S. Kids Sentenced to Life Without Parole at 14 or Younger, and All Are Black
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Afghanistan Is Worse Off Than Ever, Thanks to the Sham Army We're Propping Up
Chris Hedges

More stories by Michele Simon

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The announcement this week by Disney that the company is placing nutrition guidelines on licensed food products aimed at children (along with kid-friendly meals at theme parks) is just the latest effort by Corporate America to save its tarnished image.

Reporters are guilty of jumping every time a company makes an announcement such as Disney's, grossly exaggerating the positive health impact. Examples of stories this week include: "Disney Gets Serious on Nutrition" (Boston Globe), "Disney Cleans Plate of Junk Food" (Los Angeles Times), and the most irresponsible, "Disney Bans All Junk Food" (Daily Mail). These misleading headlines serve corporations very well because they are all most people will remember. So now parents think that Disney no longer markets junk food to kids. Only one problem: It's not true.

With rising rates of childhood obesity and diabetes, America is currently embroiled in a national debate over who is to blame for the public health crisis. Increasingly, it's not just the fat and sugar peddlers like McDonald's and Coca-Cola that are taking the heat. The major entertainment conglomerates are also finding themselves on the receiving end of public outcry. And rightly so, with cartoon "spokescharacters," toy give-aways, and other cross-promotional strategies, kids today are reduced to lucrative branding opportunities.

Why shouldn't we be impressed with Disney's press release? First of all, the company admits to a ridiculously long phase-in period. Corporations like to make announcements far ahead of when they plan to actually implement changes. Disney's timeline for getting the junk food out ranges from two to four years, partly because they are locked into preexisting licensing agreements. Surely a company with such huge bargaining power could find smart enough lawyers to renegotiate. Then again, maybe breaking current contracts would interfere with quarterly earnings. If Disney really cared about kids' health, why not either stop marketing the junk food now or simply wait until the changes are actually implemented to announce them?

Next, the Disney corporation is more than just movies and theme parks -- it's much more. The media conglomerate isn't doing anything about the junk food advertising that appears on its array of television stations, which include ABC Network, ABC Family, Disney Channel, and Toon Disney. Also, not a word was mentioned about the increasing trend of product placement in movies and television, an advertising technique that children are especially vulnerable to because of its stealth nature. (Product placement is actually illegal on children's television, but not in movies or "mixed audience" shows that also target adults.) Another technique the Disney policy is silent on is "advergaming" where kids are targeted with ads through online video games. At the home page of Disney's "Kid's Island" for example is a prominent ad for Kellogg's Frosted Flakes, which links to a full 30-second television commercial with Tony the Tiger hawking the sugary cereal.

Most importantly, Disney's announcement amounts to little more than an excuse to keep its brand in front of kids. By setting nutrition guidelines -- as opposed to stopping the promotion of cartoon-branded food altogether, as many child advocates are calling for -- Disney has cleverly given itself an entirely new marketing opportunity. According to the company 's press release, "Disney Consumer Products has already begun to offer many licensed products which comply with the guidelines. They include breakfast items such as instant oatmeal featuring characters like The Incredibles and Kim Possible, and Disney Garden fresh produce such as kid-sized apples and bananas." I've never heard of "kid-sized" fruit. Do we really need to be branding fresh produce now?

Some advocates are calling the Disney move a good first step. But who exactly is holding the company accountable to this so-called policy? Who will make sure that Disney follows through on implementation? The name of the game for food and media corporations is to stave off legally enforceable (and potentially costly) government regulations, not to mention the threat of litigation. What the food and media companies fear even more than bad PR is government meddling and lawsuits. Instead, industry touts "self-regulation" as the answer to childhood obesity, a proven failed system of corporate oversight that merely maintains the status quo of high profit margins at the expense of children's health.

And what happens when Disney starts losing money and shareholders demand putting profits ahead of health? Legally the company will have no choice but to go back to business as usual to remain competitive. As we've learned from other corporate promises -- such as McDonald's reneged 2002 pledge to stop using trans fat -- once profits dip in the next quarter, no more caring about health. That's why we really need the federal government to step in and protect children's health with enforceable regulations to curb the onslaught of junk food marketing. Until companies are legally forced to change, they won't.

While Disney is telling us its motivation is children's health, the company's true goal is to get parents to keep buying its products and visiting its theme parks, and most importantly, to keep the Disney brand in front of kids' eyes. So now cartoon characters will market allegedly healthier foods to kids. But children don't need the Incredibles to tell them when and what to eat. Kids, like adults, get hungry all by themselves. That's how nature designed us. If companies like Disney would simply get out of the way, parents would have a much easier job.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: children, disney, food, marketing

Michele Simon is a public health lawyer and author of "Appetite for Profit: How the Food Industry Undermines Our Health and How to Fight Back" (Nation Books). Visit her online at www.informedeating.org.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
exactly right
Posted by: rsaxto on Oct 19, 2006 12:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is exactly right. The bottom line of big corporations is to brainwash men, women and children into buying their products and they don't give a shit about how unhealthy any of these groups become as a result of using their products. Their heaven is simply the bottom line and their greed goal is simply to stash as much cash and stocks as they can into thier accounts. This being the case the best function of government is to create healthy guidelines for all consumers in all categories and to use the proper carrots and sticks to insure a healthy society. Government should guide corporations into healthy grooves and be immune from corporate control instead of the current practice of corporate control over governments. Impeach the Bushies and create a healthy society instead of a sick one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: exactly right Posted by: Cthulhu
The buck stops here
Posted by: mysticalrae on Oct 19, 2006 5:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The most telling phrase in this article is that shareholders in these companies are bound to clamor for higher profits and the corporations are forced into using policies that are irresponsible in the case of children's health. Who are these shareholders? What is their responsibility in all of this? If you are cashing in on any type of profits from corporate America, it is your responsibility to have done your homework and continually research the policies of the companies you are receiving profits from. Then put your money where your mouth is (no pun intended). Focus your hard-earned cash in the places it serves your community best, not just in those companies which promise the biggest profit margins and larger returns.
Imagine what this country will be like in ten or twenty years, when the people who are children now are running this country. They most likely will be suffering the effects of trans fats, corn syrup and irradiated meat products; diseased, lethargic and overweight. So much for the world's super-power. If you own a racehorse and want it to fulfill its greatest potential in the race, you don't feed it a diet of french fried potatoes and coke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Teach your children well
Posted by: inanaturallight on Oct 19, 2006 5:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I won't disagree that government regulation is important there's another, more insidious point in all this that progressives have to address- the propaganda machine. Part of the duty of raising children- a part missing from our public education system- is teaching them to think critically and question everything they see around them. Ask them questions about their feelings after seeing such an advertisement and help them to understand that advertisements are an attempt to manipulate them into wanting a particular product. When a newsperson in the MSM, in delivering or broadcasting an article draws conclusions unsupported by the factual portion of the article, point that out and ask questions about it. And get them away from the damned television... corporations spend huge amounts of money following children around to understand how children operate and what 'psychological operations' will manipulate them. (PSYOPS ain't restricted to the government, and the corporate side is far larger than the government's in terms of dollars spent.)
We can have all the regulations in the world but if we don't teach our children to think for themselves and question what they see we will just raise another generation of sheeple.
Myself I only put on PBS and even PBS can be full of the stuff. I absolutely start laughing when I come in contact with the corporate media... I haven't seen a MSM news story in years that didn't draw some conclusion not supported by the facts or try to tell me what meaning I should take away from some newsworthy event, and the advertisements always promise me eternal happiness if I buy that mop with the disposable head and the automatic floor soap dispenser.
I don't know much either about the real Walt Disney and what kind of guy he was (maybe he was just another rich corporate type under all that sweetness, or maybe he really was a nice guy) but the way I see it the Disney empire died the same year he did, and what took its place was just another corporation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrible
Posted by: Intraspecto on Oct 19, 2006 6:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, I agree with the article that corporations are evil. However, people have personal choices about what they put into their minds and bodies. That is what it comes down to. If parents would really raise their kids and treat them like they should and pay more attention to what they are eating and doing and how they are living when they are young, the payoff would be enormous. People would learn to make better decisions. However, this is something that is a dream at best I realise. So long as corporations tell us that we must work like we do and not have family lives and such, we are doomed. I feel that is is a self-destructive cycle. Support the little guy, and maybe we can make a difference.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Terrible Posted by: Cathyc
check your facts
Posted by: bayrr326 on Oct 19, 2006 6:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know it is hard to get behind an article that can't even get the studio right for the movie Spiderman. It is Sony not Disney. I agree with most of the articles on this website but I can't believe you are knocking a company like Disney for actively trying. At least they have an actual plan that is being implemented. There are many companies like Mcdonalds who make annoucements about doing something and never do it. As someone who lives in Florida and goes to Disney World alot I have already noticed changes in the menus of the restaurants. The kids meals now have carrots or applesauce as the main choice. If you want fries you have to ask for them. You know and if a sticker of Mickey or Goofy on a piece of fruit might make it more likely for the kid to want it then who cares at least they are eating something healthy. At least Disney is trying to do something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: check your facts Posted by: MicheleSimon
When were the long term contracts signed?
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Oct 19, 2006 6:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Disney couldn't have notified its existing ad contract holders of the impending changes and renegotiated those contracts with newly extended periods could it? No - surely not!

I'd like to see an enterprising investigative reporter look into that. After all, another generation of kids will go through early development over the next four years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Disney's done enough damage to this country elevating the likes of the Bush/Limbaugh GOP.
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 19, 2006 6:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WE WARNED DEMOCRATS AND AMERICA 2 YEARS AGO ABOUT DISNEY/ABC

Now the Democrats and the nation are paying the price for not taking action earlier, as The Path to 9/11, a mini-series reportedly that revises history to praise Bush and slam Clinton for 9/11, is set to take the airwaves just weeks before the election.

by Thomas J. Bico

editor-in-chief


About the food, who wouldn't do it? Why not bring in some tasty yet healthy foods into the Disney market made of soy, flax, and/or hemp? That would go a long way to getting us all closer to the real cures.

P.S.: Someone recently pointed out that carrots and applesauce are given higher priority over French fries. For now, I guess it's ok but how long has it lasted and how long do you think it will last?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

exercise regularly
Posted by: IanA on Oct 19, 2006 8:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point this article does not make is that until the individuals that make up society matures to a point where they respect themselves sufficiently, not to be lead around like sheep to consume and waste more to their own detriment, they cannot begin to respect others. And so it goes around. Individuals in a society that can be trained to consume rubbish by a cartoon rodent, or cannot appreciate that enough of anything is better than more, cannot be exercising self respect, and without self respect it is doubtful that they can learn to respect others.

The root of the problems in our egocentric, profit driven, mass consumer, materialist society seem to be caused by single dimensional views diminishing reality to a dichotomy. For example considering that if something is not controlled and regulated it will naturally leave a place for the inevitable profit seeker to abuse and damage society. So aiming for the lowest common denominator we have to restrict this here, put in security measures there and prohibit that, ever more herding the sheep in their pens, always bring the level of self responsibility down another notch, commercializing, legislating, institutionalizing what humans should be doing with common sense. But, what is created is a blithering mindless amorphous mass of humanity who can do nothing for themselves, who must act passively as they are told exactly what to do about everything, and without being told they remain immobile and immediately insecure. If people are treated like brain-washable sheep for long enough they actually behave like them.

The answer to achieving greater happiness and fulfilment in our short lives is not to make more rules and more police to protect the ignorant or restricting corporate or institutional brainwashers or their channels of information, but it is to get the sheep to think for themselves and cultivate their own self-respect in a richly diverse environment offering a multitude of choices.

Curiosity, awareness, understanding, and compassion are the natural and fundamental socializing tools which we need to exercise regularly, as important to humanity as eating or sleeping. It is these tools which protect us from our greatest enemies, our selves, our fears, our avarice, our ignorance, our lethargy. If we do not want to become just numbers in masses consuming, like mindless robots in a virtual existence, it is by exercising these tools. Only these unique resources will keep our individual “human” centre alive. Governments and corporations know that. The politicians, Disney, Exxon, and Wal-Mart know what parts to anesthetise. Do you know how to wake up?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: exercise regularly Posted by: jonestown kool-aid
Be a pepper too
Posted by: showka on Oct 19, 2006 10:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hate to say it, but I stopped reading this after the Spider Man movies were misattributed to Disney instead of Sony.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Be a pepper too Posted by: MicheleSimon
Promoting junk food? How about promoting junk wars?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Oct 19, 2006 10:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you look at TimeWarner's majority shareholders, you find that they are the same institutions who also are major players in the international oil, pharmaceutical, agricultural and arms businesses.

TimeWarner's role, in the eyes of their majority shareholders, is to protect and support their other business interests. Look at the big 5 media buildup to the war in Iraq; the pro-war commentators - etc.

Junk food? That's like charging a murderous bank robber with littering because of the spent bullet casings left on the floor!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The real obesity at Disney is in its executive paychecks.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Oct 19, 2006 11:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Disney wants to keep people coming to its theme parks, there's a better way than announcing some half-assed "improvements" to its food service and marketing plan (although Disney's ideas, if done properly, are valuable, too): stop jacking up the admission price!

Admission to Disney theme parks climbs faster than the rate of inflation, at the same time that Disney park employees don't get raises and the company skimps on new attractions. Frankly, I'd like to see patrons stay away from the parks until Disney brings its admission and concession prices back to reality, and curbs its greed in its other markets.

Right now, the only thing that will become less obese from visiting a Disney theme park is your wallet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Personal/parent responsibility?
Posted by: darkgrrrl on Oct 19, 2006 1:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"So now parents think that Disney no longer markets junk food to kids. Only one problem: It's not true."

If parents are so easily duped as to read a headline and then adopt the unquestioning belief that a corporation has their family's best interests at heart, we have larger problems. Reading labels and nutritional information before buying/eating/feeding to your kids should be standard practice for everyone.

"If companies like Disney would simply get out of the way, parents would have a much easier job."

How does a company "get in the way" of parenting? Is the ghost of Walt Disney keeping you out of your kitchen? It's parents' choice to allow their kids TV/movie/game privileges. It's parents' choice to buy brand/character toys, clothes, etc. It's parents' choice to buy Mickey-brand frozen meals for their kids.

Companies are in business to make money. If you don't like a company's practices, don't buy their products. If unhealthy food products stop making money, they'll stop making them.

Take your kids to farmer's markets, cook from scratch, and teach them how to eat well. Mickey sure isn't going to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Reading labels... Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Reading labels... Posted by: darkgrrrl
» RE: eading labels... Posted by: tlCampbell
» RE: eading labels... Posted by: realmuzik
The Left's Version of Fundamentalism
Posted by: Gravitas on Oct 19, 2006 2:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This obsession with junk food and the morality surrounding eating is the left's version of fundamentalist Christianity and its Puritanical attitudes surrounding sex. In both cases they need some type of "deviance" to latch on to. In both cases, it is tiresome and makes the situation worse.

It is amazing that we don't know one of the reasons diabetes is on the rise is because BigPharma LOWERED acceptable blood sugar for the sake of its own profit. There is also much more testing at early stages. How much diabetes has actually increased is a matter of opinion.

I think Disney and everyone else should but out of people's dinner plates. It is fine to offer healthier options but beyond that mind your own business!!!!

P.S. Just ask Mark Foley inititated a moral crusade against child abuse as an outward manifestation of his own weakness, I bet the food police are secretly gorging on Twinkies then puking later. Don't make your private obsession public domain!

"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

just say no brat
Posted by: edith on Oct 19, 2006 3:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if you've had kids you know saying no can be a pain in the butt. sometimes you have to say no. Parenting and pains in the butt go together.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Parent your little bastards
Posted by: LtL on Oct 19, 2006 3:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Corporations only care about the bottom line and don’t have your kids interest at heart. Is that news to any one.

Here is something for every parent to learn: “NO”. Try telling that to your kid. If your kid with the 35% BMI asks for the Mickey Mouse cookies say NO. Your kid asks for the video game were they can kill cops and hookers then steal a car to get away say NO. You teen ago daughter wants to dress like she’s in a rap video say NO. You are there parents not their friends you need to set boundaries.

I have no kids and could not care any less about what they are exposed to. I will not change the way I live for other people’s children. Do the damn job mommies and daddies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Parent your little bastards Posted by: jonestown kool-aid
Disney is a business
Posted by: vangogh69 on Oct 19, 2006 3:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Disney is a mega-corporation whose goal is to AMASS A PROFIT! I don't care what they say they're doing. You can be sure the point of any marketing drives to get healthy is ultimately, to sell more things marked Disney. I wish we could really stop pretending corporations care about anything other than getting our money (over and over again). Corportations merely need to be seen as caring about the public (as opposed to actually caring about the public welfare), i.e. propaganda, but the only people that really get the love are the shareholders.

And, food for thought, Disney originally (I believe) backed Michael Moore's Farenheit 9/11 then decided not to release it, not wanting to upset it's pro-bush clients in an election season (?). The film went on to be the most financially successful documentary ever made...and I'm sure Disney was kicking themselves in the ass that they didn't get all the profit!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Disney is a business Posted by: IanA
In response to the question, "Who are the shareholders?"
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Oct 19, 2006 4:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article leaves out a rather important point -

Take Kraft, for example - owned by Altria (formerly called PhillipMorris) From their websie, we have that "Altria Group, Inc. is the parent company of Kraft Foods, Philip Morris USA, Philip Morris International and Philip Morris Capital Corporation.  Altria Group owns 100% of the outstanding stock of Philip Morris USA, Philip Morris International and Philip Morris Capital Corporation, and approximately 88.1% of the stock of Kraft Foods.  Philip Morris USA is the largest tobacco company in the United States, with approximately half of the U.S. cigarette market.  Philip Morris International is a leading international tobacco company with seven of the top 20 global cigarette brands.  Kraft Foods is the largest food and beverage company headquartered in North America and the second-largest in the world."

Here are the major institutions that own Altria (the top four). I've also included their holdings in TimeWarner and Disney.

CAPITAL RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY
Altria: $12,418,452,228
Time Warner: $2,124,625,110
Disney: $1,037,670,000

STATE STREET CORPORATION
Altria: $6,090,885,958
TimeWarner: $2,168,208,169
Disney: $2,152,204,080

BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
Altria: $5,130,301,353
TimeWarner: Not Listed as holder at http://finance.yahoo.com
Disney: Not listed as holder://finance.yahoo.com

Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd
Altria:$4,934,509,731
TimeWarner: $2,313,899,444
Disney: $2,014,007,400

First, let me say that there are many other holders in these companies (four or five other majors). Also, Bank of America doesn't appear to be among the major controllers of media outlets.

Altria is cigarettes and junk food, apparently. Notice that all of these institutions have more invested in this area than they do in the media.

Media profitability is obviously not the issue - owning a media outlet 'enhances the value' of your other holdings because you control the information! These same institutions (Barclays, etc.) are also the major holders in Big Oil, Big Pharma and Big Guns.

I don't know why this topic is so roundly ignored by media outlets. Could it be that the owners don't like seeing their names in the press? Or is the media just too ashamed of their craven boot-licking behavior to ever dream of reporting on it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Disgusting!
Posted by: BobbyGreyFriar on Oct 23, 2006 12:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm the arch-apologist for free speech, but if a case for banning speech (using the word in the broadest sense) could ever be made, it could be surely made for banning advertising/marketing targeting children -- it is atrocious!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement