Advertising to moms: Things really haven’t changed much since the Mad Men era
By Robin on Aug 11, 2008 in branding, consumer, marketing, twitter | Comments
Recently, David Alston of Radian6 posted a picture, using Twitpic, of a current magazine ad for FruitLoops that freaked him out. I got the idea that he wants his kids to have healthy eating habits.
He was incredulous – is FruitLoops really trying to pass off their cereal as a good snack — a good breakfast? It tells moms that they can “feel good giving their kids a nutritious snack that won’t come back in their lunch box.” Here’s the offending ad (sideways, unfortunately, can’t figure out why it doesn’t orient properly):
![]()
A nutritious snack? FruitLoops? Last I checked, something that had a first ingredient of sugar was considered junk food. But, lets just check the nutrition label from a box of FruitLoops:
![]()
Yup, just as I suspected. High sugar, no fiber, a micron of protein – which certainly means energy, but a short burst, instead of a real satisfying snack that would keep you going.
Have advertisers really come that far from these ads, circa the 1950’s and 1960’s?
Doesn’t seem so to me. Here’s an ad from the 1950’s I’ve lovingly titled “7Up Baby.” Though its hard to read (but is easily found online), the gist of the ad is that 7Up is so natural, that its ok for even a baby to drink it. So go ahead, give that 7 month old a good chug-a-lug of 7Up and build up that lifelong craving and desire for white sugar.
How about this one, which came out as a response to artificial sweeteners being added to make low-calorie soda:
Seems like if you’re a good mom, you’ll give your teen (girl) sugar so that she will have the energy to get through her day — and its low calorie, at just 18 calories a teaspoon. ‘Cuz you wouldn’t want Mary to get fat.
My point is, advertising to moms hasn’t changed much. Now, instead of appealing to wholesome American-dream type values, its positioned around the convenient packaging of a ready-to-eat plastic bag of sugary-ness, so that you can spend one less minute making your kids lunch — since we’re all too busy to spend 5 minutes making a healthy lunch. That’s right, kids, a sugary snack is a nutritious snack.
Seeing these ads – and as many on TV that make moms/wives look like stupid dolts who get supreme life satisfaction out of: getting their husbands to eat oats, or a clean toilet bowl, or a really good dustrag – makes me downright depressed about how wives and mothers are still portrayed in media and advertising.
I guess my point is I am not surprised at the FruitLoops ad. Apparently, the market research shows that parents think cereal is a healthy snack (though this and other stories tend to refute that), so, as an extrapolation, FruitLoops must be too. But really, how many parents really believe that? And, have advertisers, who’ve been criticized for targeting children with ads for unhealthy food, really done much to change?
Oh, and don’t think I have it in for just FruitLoops and Kellogg’s. Plenty of the high-end brands sold as “natural and healthy” have as much or more sugar in their cereals, too. Organic sugar isn’t any better than plain old sugar, when it comes to sugar cereal. It’s just more expensive.
-
Robin
-
jennydecki
-
David Alston
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=eb379a30-2bc9-48e8-9eed-f9b80f8af4bd)

Stumble it!
