Regulating Food Advertising and Freedom of Speech

Essay 2, Summary and Response Regulating food for thought Advertising and granting immunity of Speech Perspectives on Advertising and Children Summary As the causation of expression Regulating Food Advertising to Children, Margo G. Wootan proposes, Responsible feed merchandising to children must(prenominal) address non only how fare is marketed entirely also which foods argon marketed to kids (334). She believes that even in the absence of government control there should be or so guideline for food marketing to act responsibly and not encour get along children to eat foods that atomic number 18 harmful to their health and well-being.Because of the increasing ordinate of puerility obesity in the United States, the author suggests a via media approach between marketing techniques and comestibleary criteria to be met for children up to the hop on of eighteen (333). Food marketing is extremely influential in childrens food choices since it attracts their attention with the appeal of contests, prizes, cartoon characters, and their celebrity icons.Although parents are a huge accountability for the food their children eat, Wootan believes its rather difficult for parents to argue with what marketing advertises as effectual as opposed to what parents consider is healthy for their children (333). The author suggests marketing being consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Ameri lowlifes with the reduction of calories, sodium, bully sugars, and saturated and trans fats in order to support not overeating with honest portion sizes directly and indirectly.Also, to stop and prevent unhealthy eating habits, food marketing should redesign products to improve their nutritional quality, including adding more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains presented in homes as well as school environments (335). As Wootan states, The marketing of products that whitethorn not be nutrition whollyy ideal but provide near positive nutritional benefit and that could help children meet the Dietary Guidelines for Americans is the net compromise that benefits both food marketing and the health of todays children (334).In Advertising and Freedom of Speech Beware of the Food Nanny, author Robert Liodice justifies the grandeur of free speech by saying, Trampling on the First Amendment, whether through with(predicate) government controls or unsupported self-regulatory edicts, should not even be on anyones radar screen as a way to adjudicate problems. Liodice believes CSPI overlooks a wide variety of factors beyond marketing that influence childhood food consumption (336). He thinks the guidelines on nutrition and marketing are so restrictive that its supported by flawed data and omit the significant, positive improvements food and marketing industries are taking.For example, the marketing exertion established the Childrens Advertising Review Unit (CARU), which screens material that whitethorn be misleading and receives comments and concerns from th e in the public eye(predicate) for the past thirty years (336). The author states CSPI mentioned a claim that marketing targeted at kids has doubled in the depart ten years, but neglects to explain food ads seen by children under the age of twelve declined by 13% in the last four years.Liodice insinuates CSPIs narrow focus solely on food marketing misguides the public when other factors come into play because there is no simple or quick answer to this multifaceted challenge, as the Surgeon General cogitate (337). Response Based on both arguments on food marketing aimed towards children and freedom of speech, I understand where each author is coming from and I agree with both to rough extent. Wootans article makes a sound point that there are many factors that scratch food choices, but food choices are mainly influential by persuasive and dinky food marketing.Companies have extensive expertise and efficient skills to lure children into deficient a line of products that may no t be as nutritional but is portrayed as desirable. I also agree that some of Wootans claims are invalid due to the lack of details and license compared to Liodices more specified examples and statistics on food marketing and their effectiveness. Because food marketing is Wootans only topic of debate, she disregards the other many factors that affect food choices by not elaborating upon them.For example, American consumers have full experience of the importance of personal and parental responsibility, public education, dietary balance and moderation, and of course, tangible activity yet Wootan only focuses on the negatives of food marketing when all these factors are just as imperative in addressing the issues of childhood nutrition and obesity. In my opinion, Robert Liodice is correct in advocating free speech to be the butt of choice and personal responsibility.Everyone has a right their own opinion, however, I adoptt see the problem with the help of government control for som e guidance with the public in order to educate them of a better lifestyle. With a set of guidelines, it will help set a meter for people to follow. Marketing and advertising cannot persuade everyone to eat healthier because they can only do so much to expose people of the advantages and benefits of a nutritional dietthat is if people even pay attention to food advertisement.Healthy eating habits will all boil down to the individual decision making whether or not to put nutritional food in their mouth. whole works Cited Wootan, Margo G. Regulating Food Advertising to Children. Think Critical Thinking andLogic Skills for passing(a) Life. 2nd ed. Ed. Judith A. Boss. New York McGraw-Hill,2012. 333-335. Print. Liodice, Robert. Advertising and Freedom of Speech Beware of the Food Nanny. ThinkCritical Thinking and Logic Skills for Everyday Life. 2nd ed. Ed. Judith A. Boss. NewYork McGraw-Hill, 2012. 335-337. Print.