4 ms·
What's to explain? They feel good when consumed, and thus improve one's life, even if only for a fleeting moment. Who is buying Lucky Charms because they find
by randomdata 2y ago
What's to explain? They feel good when consumed, and thus improve one's life, even if only for a fleeting moment.
Who is buying Lucky Charms because they find them disgusting, but somehow see them as being important? Let's be real: People only (continue to, at least – they may buy once just to try) buy Lucky Charms if they like consuming them.
- sebastiennight 2y ago> Who is buying Lucky Charms because they find them disgusting, but somehow see them as being important? Have... you met a teenager? I'm failing to see the point of this example, as I don't think I've never met a single person who found their first cigarette enjoyable. Is your experience that people buy their first and second pack out of enjoyment of the taste?
- randomdata 2y agoI have never met a teenager who is concerned about eating a "whole" breakfast, no, especially if that "whole" breakfast requires eating something that is otherwise unpleasant. Even if this so-called whole breakfast was some scientific truth, proven to improve health outcomes, what teenager would care? Have... you met a teenager? I don't really see the point of the example either, frankly, but it is what we were given. I expect the contextual parent was just desperately trying to come up with something in the absence of having something meaningful to say.
- ndriscoll 2y agoThe point of the example is that there are plenty of things that have no benefit at all, and in fact have obvious downsides that everyone knows about. However, there is an immense amount of marketing around those things to try to make them seem "cool" and minimize their perceived harm. People get addicted to these things, and struggle to stop consuming them even when they know they're literally dying from it. No one in their right mind would ever give their kids Oreos for breakfast, but somehow advertisements make people feel comfortable giving them Oero O's. Any person of sound mind would say that giving that to your kids as a meal is neglect, but people do it, and it's "normal". This is the harm that marketing is capable of. Cookies are, in fact, not a part of a complete breakfast. Evidently, you can convince people that they are by just repeating the message thousands of times to them. I don't see how the people who are involved in making those ads (or the products) can live with themselves. Convincing people to e.g. set their kids up for a life of obesity and early T2 diabetes from poor dietary habits is pure evil, and that's just one example of horrible (yet completely mundane for them) things marketers do. Just imagine being a person who wakes up in the morning and thinks about how to best convince children to try ingesting poison[0]: > Juul Labs, the vaping company that has long insisted it never marketed its products to teenagers, purchased ad space in its early days on numerous youth-focused websites, including those of Nickelodeon, the Cartoon Network, Seventeen magazine and educational sites for middle school and high school students, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday by the Massachusetts attorney general. Everyone involved in something like that should be put in prison. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/health/juul-vaping-lawsuit.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/health/juul-vaping-lawsui...
- randomdata 2y ago> No one in their right mind would ever give their kids Oreos for breakfast Assuming you are going to feed your children Oreos at some point, why not for breakfast? > Cookies are, in fact, not a part of a complete breakfast. They could be. If you are going to eat them anyway, why not at breakfast? > Evidently, you can convince people that they are by just repeating the message thousands of times to them. Evidently not. Remember, a "complete breakfast" refers to a specific culinary dish that consists of items like bacon, sausages, eggs, baked beans, tomatoes, mushrooms, etc. Who eats a bowl of cookies in addition to all that? I've certainly never met such a person. I've known people who eat bowls of cookies for breakfast, indeed, but when they do that's approximately the only thing they eat, which violates what is told in the advertisement. The advertisement you point to is abundantly clear that these cookies are only to be eaten with all those other foods. Evidently people don't pay attention to what is said and will go off and do their own thing.
- ndriscoll 2y ago> Evidently people don't pay attention to what is said and will go off and do their own thing. It's almost like that was the intention. It's weird how the ad doesn't prominently show the eggs, beans, etc. and talk about how great they are, and instead focuses on how you can totally eat cookies for breakfast! Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnvHUXssIAo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnvHUXssIAo "Not Candy! Resees Puffs cereal!" It is candy. Like 1/3 of the mass is added sugar, and the other 2/3 is more carbs. And what's the complete breakfast that goes with it? Two slices of white-bread toast, a glass of milk, and a glass of juice. Even the "complete" breakfast is garbage. The bowl almost certainly has more than the 1 cup serving as well. The purpose of this commercial is not to inform you about how to use their product as part of a healthy diet (because it isn't a part of a healthy diet). It is to turn your brain off and get you to buy something that you intuitively know is not appropriate. People received the intended message. Even if they did show their product as a small side (rather than a centerpiece) of an otherwise healthy breakfast, it's still ridiculous to suggest that you should be giving your kids candy with any regularity. My oldest kid is 3, and I don't think she has had an Oreo. Will she before she's 18? Probably. Has she had some other treats? Sure. But it's not at all a regular thing. It's certainly not part of a daily diet.