You may remember last year when a proposal in California passed to ban toys from being given away as congratulatory swag for buying your kid fast food. The proposal was met with some celebration as well as some apathy from both the political people and the food people. I admit, I myself am on the fence as to whether toys given away with fast food meals really encourage purchases or not. But I remember that my kids are young and we stick to TV that doesn't have commercials, like PBS or Nick Jr for that very reason. When they become older it is much more probable that they will beg for food and toys being advertised on TV.
So it seems that my beloved and always progressive New York City is set to ask itself the same question, "should fast food be marketed towards children?" Read the original New York Post article and tell me what you think? Would it work? Does the inclusion of toys make that much of a difference? Could this be misconstrued as a cost cutting measure for fast food companies? What do YOU think?
>
> http://m.nypost.com/f/mobile/news/local/councilman_wants_to_ban_toys_sold_Btpd4jMDHxAgSrbfnPnIuK
>
>
I think that the toy in the meal is a HUGE part of why kids want the meal in the first place. At least for my son. It really irritates me when I come home and he says, "Look what I got in my Happy Meal!" and he's so excited and he loves the toy. Especially when I leave specific meals in the fridge that they could have had for lunch. He will badger my husband until DH gives in and they end up going 2 to 3 times a week to McDonald's! GRRRR!!! After a while DH figured out that it's really the toy he wants because our son wasn't really eating the food. I really wish they didn't have toys as an incentive to buy the Happy Meals.
ReplyDelete