Comments on: ACMA putting industry before children’s health http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/acma-putting-industry-before-childrens-health/ now with extra source Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:27:09 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: mike smith http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/acma-putting-industry-before-childrens-health/#comment-18456 mike smith Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-18456 All well and good, but it misses the point, which is that if you are watching TV in the first place, you're a candidate for obesity in that you are sitting down and not exercising. Ads that show "what's coming up" are equally bad, they encourage you to remain watching. Stop attacking symptoms and go after causes. All well and good, but it misses the point, which is that if you are watching TV in the first place, you’re a candidate for obesity in that you are sitting down and not exercising. Ads that show “what’s coming up” are equally bad, they encourage you to remain watching. Stop attacking symptoms and go after causes.

]]> By: Dacquiri http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/acma-putting-industry-before-childrens-health/#comment-18457 Dacquiri Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-18457 Go Boyd! ACMA's so-called 'economic analysis' is laughably based on banning all food & drink advertising from free to air tv -- as they claim it is not possible to talk only about junk food since there is no tool for separating the junk food from the good stuff. We have been waiting for this report for more than 12 months. They really needn't have bothered. Go Boyd! ACMA’s so-called ‘economic analysis’ is laughably based on banning all food & drink advertising from free to air tv — as they claim it is not possible to talk only about junk food since there is no tool for separating the junk food from the good stuff. We have been waiting for this report for more than 12 months. They really needn’t have bothered.

]]> By: Martin http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/acma-putting-industry-before-childrens-health/#comment-18458 Martin Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-18458 One of the most obvious ways to stop this blatant abuse by the food industry, and it being allowed by ACMA, to push it's junk food and dubious other commercial items during childrens free to air T.V. is simple. <br /><br />The federal government must fund the ABC to open it's dedicated digital kids channel, ABC 3. One thing is for sure...there will be no advertisements! One of the most obvious ways to stop this blatant abuse by the food industry, and it being allowed by ACMA, to push it’s junk food and dubious other commercial items during childrens free to air T.V. is simple.

The federal government must fund the ABC to open it’s dedicated digital kids channel, ABC 3. One thing is for sure…there will be no advertisements!

]]> By: Andrew http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/09/01/acma-putting-industry-before-childrens-health/#comment-18459 Andrew Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-18459 Its the classic pea-and-shell game of the advertising industry being bought by the innocent rubes at the regulator. On the one hand there is the demand for ironclad evidence that advertising increases junk-food consumption among the young. On the other, there is the fact that the industry exists on selling people the premise that this is a proven fact. If advertising is not actually a fraud perpetrated on the makers of bad food everywhere, then it logically follows that it has an adverse impact on children's diets. Whether it is bad enough to cause all or some of the epidemic whale-ism observed in the young is pretty much beside the point - no-one actually claims junk food is a diet which should be promoted to the young. Its the classic pea-and-shell game of the advertising industry being bought by the innocent rubes at the regulator. On the one hand there is the demand for ironclad evidence that advertising increases junk-food consumption among the young. On the other, there is the fact that the industry exists on selling people the premise that this is a proven fact. If advertising is not actually a fraud perpetrated on the makers of bad food everywhere, then it logically follows that it has an adverse impact on children’s diets. Whether it is bad enough to cause all or some of the epidemic whale-ism observed in the young is pretty much beside the point - no-one actually claims junk food is a diet which should be promoted to the young.

]]>