Sandra Steingraber wrote the essay titled, “My Children: The Food Experiment” about her experience as a mother of two children who have never been exposed to any type of advertisements or propaganda regarding commercialized food products. Steingraber and her family moved to a cabin in the woods near Ithaca, New York and when the family arrived at their new home the discovered their television had been stolen. They decided not to replace the television, which did not seem like a conscious decision to not expose their children to advertisement as much as it related to it not being a central part of their current life or lack of finances to replace it. Not replacing the television provided a context clue that this experiment was not planned, …show more content…
The first discovery was a community-supported organic farm nearby they could join and pick fresh produce. Second, they were able to join a cooperative grocery store that offered a variety of organic items. Lastly, if Jeff worked a couple hours a week at the coop grocery store they received a discount which helped with the cost and prevented them from having to shop elsewhere for other household items. Steingraber’s experiment went on for five years and neither of their children have been exposed to advertising. That includes not only advertising on television but in grocery stores as well, which are often aimed, positioned, and marketed to small …show more content…
I believe the inductive argument made by Steingraber used empirical reasoning based on the evidence presented. Realizing children’s minds can be affected in either a positive or negative way by media advertising was her original hypothesis. As time passed, Steingraber tweaked her initial hypothesis when different variables came into play, such as eating fast food at McDonalds and her children starting school. This self-corrective process efficiently showed her empirical reasoning was based on measurable manifestations. She understood that advertising was merely one method which could influence children’s decisions on what they like and don’t like, but also realized other factors were involved that would have just as much influence. Each time a different variable was introduced to her children, their hypothesis was verified; for example, when the children hated the food from McDonalds. The experiment is open for independent verification because it was and could be repeated again and again in different scenarios; however, it could be critiqued as very rare that children will respond in this manner due to having only two test
By accepting misguided information about the food that is being purchased from the marketers, consumers are letting the food industry shape buying patterns, even when it is not to their benefit. Pollan supports this claim when he writes, “With all the variety and constant stream of messages from the food industry and media, how can we make up our minds” (86). Pollan’s quote elaborates on how the the constant stream of messages affects what Americans put into their bodies.
A common theme in entertainment today is the question “Just because I can, should I do it?” Usually this is applied to moral issues or controversial scientific breakthroughs. Yet, very little of the American public even bother to ask this about food science and production. As long as the food tastes good and is convenient, most people don’t really care. Melanie Warner, overall, was just like most Americans. In her book she documents how a former business journalist became infatuated with the longevity of cheese, guacamole, and other normal American cuisine. It’s a dark hole. Most readers will be horrified and confused with such production methods. While Warner’s book isn’t a scientific study, her neutral style and intriguing investigation
In the article “The End of Food,” Lizzie Widdicombe describes an advancement of our food culture through a new product developed by three young men living in San Francisco’s Tenderloin district. After failing to produce new inexpensive cellphone towers on a hundred seventy thousand dollar investment, the three men went on to try and develop software with their remaining funding. While trying to maximize their funding’s longevity, they realized that their biggest budget impediment was food. In fact, it reached the point where their diet comprised of mostly fast food, and eventually they despised the fact that they had to spend so much time and money on eating. Due to this hardship, Rob Rhinehart, one of the entrepreneurs, came up with the
Obesity in the United States, which the media has labeled a national crisis, has also been connected to poverty rates. Big fast food industry’s target poor communities, and spend millions of dollars each year to create advertising that appeals to these specific areas. These industry’s also target naïve children when advertising because they know that eating habits developed in childhood are usually carried into adulthood. Children who are exposed to television advertisements for unhealthy food and who are not educated well enough on good nutrition will grow up and feed their families the same unhealthy foods they ate as kids. A big way fast food giants are able to make certain young people have access to unhealthy food is by strategically placing franchises in close proximity to schools. They will often place three times as many outlets within walking distance of schools than in areas where there are no schools nearby. The way fast food advertising is targeted towards children is very alarming considering how important good nutrition is for young people and how a child’s eating habits can affect their growth and
In Robert Kenner’s documentary film, Food Inc., the purpose is to inform Americans the reality of the food industry. The film illustrates the malevolent side of the food industry rather than an advertised image. Compelling images are used to show the horrors of the food industry such as the visuals of innocent animals being slaughtered and mistreated by the second. The claims that the film asserts have further expanded the ominous image of the food industry. Food inc. portrays a warning for Americans about what they are really eating, one can take a stand for better and safer foods.
of Philip Morris, said “People could point to these things and say, ‘They’ve got too much sugar, they’ve got too much salt […] well, that’s what the consumer wants, and we’re not putting a gun to their head to eat it. That’s what they want.” (Moss 267) However, consumers are being unconsciously forced to fund food industries that produce junk food. Companies devote much of their time and effort into manipulating us to purchase their products. For instance, Kraft’s first Lunchables campaign aimed for an audience of mothers who had far too much to do to make time to put together their own lunch for their kids. Then, they steered their advertisements to target an even more vulnerable pool of people; kids. This reeled in even more consumers because it allowed kids to be in control of what they wanted to eat, as Bob Eckert, the C.E.O. of Kraft in 1999, said, “Lunchables aren’t about lunch. It’s about kids being able to put together what they want to eat, anytime, anywhere” (Moss 268). While parents are innocently purchasing Lunchables to save time or to satisfy the wishes of their children, companies are formulating more deceiving marketing plans, further studying the psychology of customers, and conducting an excessive quantity of charts and graphs to produce a new and addictive
Crouse, Janice Shaw. "The Fast-Food Industry Intentionally Markets Unhealthy Food to Children." Fast Food. Ed. Tracy Brown Collins. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2009. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 14 Apr. 2011.
In another in-film experiment, Spurlock scours each of the McDonald’s restaurants in New York City for the nutritional information about their food. In a stunning turn of events, 50% of those locations had a single wall poster with nutritional information, roughly 20% had pamphlets with nutritional information, and less than 10% had both. Even though these statistics are circumstantial, they nevertheless illustrate how vast consumer ignorance is and how little McDonald’s is concerned about it in their pursuit of business.
These irate parents believe fast food companies are to blame for their children’s extreme weigh gain and health problems. Zincenko sympathizes with these lawsuits by comparing them to his own obesity problems as a child as a result of eating fast food consistently. His own single, struggling parents choose to feed him fast food because of its affordability and convenience. He emphasizes McDonalds can be found on almost every street corner throughout the United States, but healthy options are much more difficult and expensive to find. Zincenko’s expresses his concern of fast food companies spending billions of dollars a year advertising their “dangerous services” to unsuspecting children without any health information or safety
In the United States, food advertising has molded the way americans eat, lived and dined as a family and as consumers for years and has molded the in the wake of changing businesses and their demands, of the media, communication technologies, and cultural american history. Advertising, print media as well as television has been made to intrigue the minds throughout amaerican history and cause people to try new foods, to help spread the various types of cuisine throught the United States.
The story, In Praise of Fast Food, written by Rachel Laudan is an evaluation argument recommending healthy food choices in comparison to fast food. Laudan responds by sharing her experience with growing up on a farm and a child and eating food from her family garden. “Modern, fast, processed food is a disaster” (Faigley 302). In this writing selection, the author provided effective evidence to argue the inadequate safety of food today saying, “They built granaries, dried their meat and their fruit, salted and smoked their fish, curdled and fermented their dairy products, and cheerfully used additives and preservatives- sugar, salt, oil, vinegar, lye- to make audible foodstuffs” (Faigley 304). Food in the past was very different than what we have today.
Children are known for their naivety and easily persuaded personas. Fast food markets prey on this fact while marketing their products to this malleable audience. According to Eric Schlosser, an acclaimed investigative journalist, children are the target for many fast...
Moerdyk, Chris. "Advertising Alone Cannot Be Blamed for Childhood Obesity." Ed. David M. Haugen. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 20 Mar. 2014.
As a little girl I loved watching television shows on Saturday mornings. I’d get upset when a show would proceed to commercial. That is until I watched the shiny new toy being played with by the girl my age and of course the cool new one that came into the happy meal, then I’d forget. After seeing the appealing commercial I’d run to my mom and try to slickly mention it. “You know McDonalds has a new Monster’s Inc. toy in their happy meal. Isn’t that great? “Now I realize that back then I was targeted by big companies to beg my parents for things that I didn’t need or that wasn’t good for me in order to make money. Advertising today is affecting the health of today’s children because they eat the unhealthy foods advertised to them on: television, the internet, and even at school. Therefore, an impassioned discussion of possible solutions has been brewing.
To begin, advertisements tend to focus on children, as their minds are easier to influence, due to the lack of understanding of things. Toy companies, for example, may convince children, through TV ads, that the product offered is unquestionably necessary to have, and since children have no knowledge about expenses, they are more likely to encourage their parents into buying a product. Therefore, as a result of companies focusing on kids, businesses have a greater possibility on being successful at selling their product. Nonetheless, as children learn about what surrounds them, sometimes the information put out there might not always be appropriate for children, and consequently, youngsters may interpret things drastically different. For instance, a child may desire to live the life that is shown in an advertisement or may think that a commercial about someone doing something wrong is right. While this is to true to a degree, what makes the difference is the responsibility of parents ...