That's Fit

Last Wednesday, French fashion houses, advertising firms, and media houses banded together to declare super-skinny models out of style. With the support of the Minister of Health, they signed an agreement to stop using models whose appearance could contribute to an unhealthy body image for girls. The agreement doesn't exactly restrict the use of too-thin models, but it's a show of good faith.

France's National Assembly is also reviewing a project that could make the promotion of unhealthy body images punishable by law.

Young girls in particular are susceptible to low self-esteem and a flawed body image. The number of pro-anorexia web sites on the Internet is proof that body image is an ever increasing concern. It's high time we all learn to love ourselves a little more -- bumps and flaws included. Fitness and nutrition is for health and wellness -- super-skinny may look good in pair of size 0 jeans but it's far from healthy.

Surveys say 21-to 35-year-olds prefer wine to beer. They just don't know much about the wine they prefer and have no strong loyalties to any specific brands. A good thing for advertisers who can tempt just about any palate.

Enter viral advertising, a technique that uses existing social networks to create brand awareness and sales. Forget billboards, TV, and print ads. This approach uses video clips, video games, e-mail blasts, and advertising at music events and other gatherings.

Sacre Bleu, a 45,000-bottle-a-year elite operation, is jumping at the chance to win over young drinkers with this method. Websites, podcasts, and MySpace pages will hopefully hook this population. Another selling point: Sacre Bleu wine is as natural as it can be -- with no added sugar or acids.

So wine isn't all that bad. It's healthy in fact if consumed moderately. But I tend to think advertisers wish for more than moderate sales. What do you think? A healthy endeavor or not?

Should people be able to sue tobacco companies for unfair and deceptive advertising regarding "low tar," "ultra light" or "mild" cigarettes? That's the question Supreme Court justices will have to address soon. Three Maine residents filed suit for misleading them on cigarettes which were supposed to have lower tar and nicotine. The original case was thrown out, but the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals brought it back to life.

Now cigarette makers want the Supreme Court to put a stop to lawsuits like this. The court will have to decide whether or not claims about advertising can be used against the tobacco industry. After using these so-called light smokes for 15 years, the Maine plaintiffs allege Philip Morris and Altria Group had research showing that people smoking "low tar" cigarettes had to inhale more to get the same effect as regular cigarettes.

Of course, this isn't the first time a similar disagreement was thrown out of court. But appeals have a way of dragging on, so it will be some time before this is settled. It's hard to point fingers when someone knowingly puts toxic chemicals in their body for a decade and a half. Should tobacco companies be liable? That's something for the court to decide.

Everytime I glance at a cigarette pack, I'm greeted with a disturbing image of black lungs and rotting teeth. Whenever I turn on the TV, I witness an upsetting commercial on the dangers of drinking or drugs. But though its effects are just as deadly, I never see any sort of ad explaining the harmful effects of being obese. Rather, it's the complete opposite -- all ads highly exalt fattening foods with carefully crafted ads aimed at the gullible consumer. Do you see something wrong here?

The author of this article thinks so -- advertising is tailored to obesity, and with the exception of ads for weight-loss pills and products, there are few ads on TV that will make us consider the destructive effects that living on a diet of junk food will have on our health.

No one is advocating ads that make fun of those overweight, but something needs to be done, don't you think? A Surgeon General's warning of the effects of obesity printed on to French fry containers, soda cans and cheeseburger wrappers, perhaps? What do you think?

Now here are some kids who aren't messing around. They are mad. They want us to know about it. And here's what they have to say:

We're tired of being the fattest, most unfit generation ever. "Big industries" spend $12 billion a year advertising junk to us. Why? We influence tens of billions in spending. Health care costs will exceed $4 trillion just when we'll be raising our families, we're freaking out. We've got digital, communication, and tech-expertise no other generation's ever had. Join us sharing energy, creativity and social action that'll change the world. To junk food & big marketing -- "Get outta my face!"

A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study found food is the number one product advertised to kids, and this motivated bunch wants it to stop. Visit their blog here. Then check out this PBS Commentary. And this Washington Post story too.

Now tell us: What do you think?

I remember taking a class in university where we discussed the history of marketing products to children. Giants like Disney and McDonald's got in the business early, convincing kids that their toys and burgers were must-haves. Since the start, many other companies have gotten on board, realizing the money-making potential that lies in advertising products to easily-influenced and hard-to-ignore (by weary parents anyway) kids.

Is it ethical? I suppose it depends on your personal point of view. At the very least I can understand why a company like Disney, whose brand focuses on kid-friendly products, would market to children. I'm not so sure what to think though when a company like Starbucks admits that kids and teens are a part of their client base.

As Heather Craven at ParentDish points out, most Starbucks beverages are chock full of sugar and caffeine, neither of which need to be ingested by kids on a regular basis. It may be hard to refuse your children when they're begging for a giant-sized white chocolate beverage, but Craven pledges to save her money and deny her children.

What would you do? Do you thi it's unethical of Starbucks to market caffeine-filled drinks to kids?

Until recently, Apple computers had a new campaign for their iMac that said "You can't be too thin, or too powerful." but it caused so much controversy they ended up changing it. The Alliance for Eating Disorders Awareness called on Apple to rethink the message they were sending, stating "What kind of message is Apple sending our youth with an ad campaign of this nature?"

What do you think, was Apple's slogan in bad taste? I hate the stigma of today's media pressuring young people to be ultra-thin as much as the next person, but electronics are another story. Can't we separate the two?

I can see the point of how a message like that could easily be misconstrued, but if the modeling and fashion industries were promoting healthy images this wouldn't even be an issue -- the slogan would be about computers and that's it. Seems like people are getting all bent out of shape over side issues instead of the real problem.

Food Labels can be confusing, but it's important to know what you're putting into your body. Glee Magazine has come up with a handy list of things to consider when you're reading the labels on your favourite food items:

• Look at how many servings are in a package. The calorie count might be low because it lists a serving that is only a quarter of what you might eat from the package.
  
• Look beyond the front label -- Just because it says 'low fat' in bold letters, doesn't mean it's healthy.
• Remember that labels are ads and food manufacturers will say anything to get you to buy their product
• Don't be influenced by empty names. Anything that promises it's 'natural' could be lying
• Don't allow yourself to be swayed by the pictures. They don't mean anything.
  

What do you look for in labels? I look for honest advertising, and I always look at the ingredients. Remember that the first few things on the ingredients list are the things that are most prominent in the food.

Marketers are going further and further these days to grab people's attention, but one series of yogurt ads may have gone a little too far, and has subsequently been stirring up a considerable amount of controversy.

The ads are for a Itambé Fit Light Yogurt, and spoof famous scenes from Basic Instinct, The Seven-Year Itch, and American Beauty. In the spots, plus-sized models replace Sharon Stone (Basic Instinct), Marilyn Monroe (Seven-Year Itch) and Mena Suvari (American Beauty). The tag line reads: "Forget about it. Men's preference will never chance. Fit Light Yogurt."

Essentially, "men will never find plus-sized women attractive, so eat our yogurt and stay thin."

Most of the reaction to the ads on the Internet has been negative, calling the ads offensive to their target audience, and reliant on outdated, backwards thinking. However, some have noted an unintentional positive message in the spots -- essentially, that "those pictures of an XXL-size lady look good!"

What do you think? Is it an effective ad, or simply in poor taste?

Nickelodeon is the latest to come under fire in the battle against childhood obesity. A recent study showed that more than 80% of the foods and snacks advertised on the network are unhealthy -- including products tied to popular characters like SpongeBob SquarePants and Dora the Explorer. As a result (and in light of the growing childhood obesity problem), a nutrition advocacy group is asking Nickelodeon to make some changes -- saying they could advertise less junk food and more toys or games.

People for Nickelodeon insist that they have been and remain focused on "balanced messaging," and that currently 10% of the network's airtime is devoted to promoting healthy food choices like fruits and vegetables. They say they will continue to work with advertisers to encourage healthy lifestyle choices for kids.

Sounds like nothing is changing anytime soon.

My outlook, when it comes to weight loss and beauty fads, is a kind of mix between realistic skepticism and dreamy hopefulness. It's no fun to go through life all pessimistic and negative, shooting down every new invention and medical breakthrough before it even has a chance, but on the flip side you don't want to fall victim to random fads and gimmicks either. But how to know when they're just gimmicks and when they might be the real thing? After all, if that tube of lotion really does melt fat right off I don't want to be the one missing out!

Obviously there's no good answer to that question, except that if a product really does what it says it can then you'll definitely hear about it. But other than that, trying stuff out (and avoiding claims that seem to good to be true) is really the only way, and thankfully there are plenty of people out there willing to do that and share what they think. Case in point? This article from the Seattle Times, where three lotions claiming weight loss and firming properties were tested by real ladies, who share their thoughts and opinions to hopefully save us all some time and potential grief.

And let me encourage you all to please feel free to share your own experiences, so we can all know more of what works and what doesn't!

I would have thought the days of "weight loss in a pill" products were numbered (the credible ones anyway), but they just keep coming! The latest is from GlaxoSmithKline and it's called Alli. It's a version of Xenical, and it's the first drug to be approved by the FDA for sale without a prescription and over-the-counter in the U.S. It works by preventing some absorption of fat into the body.

The advertising of this product will be interesting, with more than $150 million dollars budgeted for marketing alone they plan on taking a slightly different approach than many diet pills have in the past: it's gonna take work on your part too. Interesting.

Learn more at myalli.com.

The dairy industry has been touting the benefits of milk and milk products and how it helps with weight loss for years, but now the USDA says they have to stop. Although leaders at the National Dairy Council say they stand behind the messages they've been promoting to the public, they have agreed to switch their focus from dairy helps weight loss to dairy helps with weight maintenance. There just isn't enough scientific proof that milk really does help people lose weight.

With this issue coming to the forefront, some experts are starting to scrutinize other claims coming from the dairy industry, such as "milk builds strong bones," and are suggesting there isn't enough research to back them up either.

So much for truth in advertising!

I grew up on McDonald's, KFC and similar chains, so seeing fast food ads can be very mouthwatering -- even when I know it's awful for me. However, what you see in the photos is almost never what you get.

To help bring the advertising myth back down to reality, The West Virginia Surf Report has started photographing real fast food, and posting those photos as side-by-side comparisons with photos from ads for the same product.

According to the site: "Each item was purchased, taken home, and photographed immediately. Nothing was tampered with, run over by a car, or anything of the sort. It is an accurate representation in every case. Shiny, neon-orange, liquefied pump-cheese, and all."

This is equal parts disturbing and hysterical. It's amazing how unappetizing the food looks when it comes fresh the kitchen, instead of the photography studio.

The series is continually updated, so check it out if you have a moment. The Burger King Whopper (pictured above) is my personal favorite. Gross.

[via Boing Boing]

I must say, one of the things I'm most thankful for in this world of media and agendas is the "truth in advertising" concept. Now it's true that companies put all kinds of spins and catch phrases on their products, but it's nice to know that ultimately what they literally say on the label must be true.

Case in point: Quaker has agreed (albeit after threat of lawsuit) to re-word some of the claims on its oatmeal packages to eliminate "exaggerated health claims." No worries, oatmeal is still a very heatlhy food. But it's not necessarily magical in its abilities to fight cholesterol and other conditions, so the label will no longer imply that it is.

Now I'm not saying food and nutrition labeling is perfect, in fact it's far from it. But I do take some solace in the fact that at least it's supposed to be.