Tony the Tiger and Frosted Flakes. Toucan Sam and Froot Loops. As children, we associated our favorite breakfast cereals with these lovable characters. They taught us that Kellogg's cereals were part of a balanced breakfast and rooted Kellogg in our minds as a fun, wholesome brand.
But were these cute characters also affecting us in other, less innocuous ways? Recent charges that the use of cartoon characters in children's advertisements is influencing young consumers to choose less healthy food products may land these beloved characters in some unfamiliar territory: a courtroom.
Yes, Kellogg and Viacom, the media company that owns the kid-friendly Nickelodeon network (and the copyrights to SpongeBob Squarepants, Dora the Explorer and the Rugrats - cartoon characters that frequently appear on children's food packaging), may soon find themselves in court.
The charge: promoting unhealthful foods to children under eight years of age through media and on-package marketing.
And although cartoon-laden packaging may seem a world away from you now, the story actually hits much closer to home than you may think: Parents from two Boston-area communities have initiated the complaint with a letter of intent to file suit against the companies.
The concerned parents, who hail from Wakefield and Brookline, join the Boston-based Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood and the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) - a non-profit nutrition watchdog organization - in filing the complaint.
Together, they intend to ask a Massachusetts court to instruct the companies to stop marketing junk foods to audiences under eight years old.
The potential plaintiffs argue that Kellogg and Viacom are harming kids' health by marketing foods to them that are almost exclusively high in calories and low in nutrients.
The charge came shortly after the Institute of Medicine reported that "food advertising aimed at kids gets them to prefer - and request - foods high in calories and low in nutrients."
According to a 2005 CSPI analysis, 98 percent of Kellogg's advertisements on Saturday morning television show foods of poor nutritional quality. Sugary cereals and fast foods were advertised on Nickelodeon more than any other foods.
While many may argue that it is a parents' responsibility to purchase healthful foods for his or her children, proponents of the suit charge that parental authority is being undermined by the constant marketing that youth are exposed to through television, the Internet, food packaging and magazines. Some concerned parents, like those involved in this case, feel that their efforts to promote healthful dietary habits are being muted by the unavoidable food marketing aimed at their children.
Kid-directed marketing is pervasive on TV and the Internet, but it is also creeping onto supermarket shelves with the rise of licensed characters like SpongeBob who appear on everything from Kraft Macaroni and Cheese to Kellogg's Pop-Tarts. Movie advertisements and product tie-ins, like Burger King's use of characters from Nickelodeon's "Rugrats Go Wild," are also increasingly used to market kids' meals at fast food chains.
Studies have documented that young children under the age of seven or eight have little understanding of the persuasive intent of advertising. Children under eight are viewed as a population vulnerable to misleading advertising; children do not understand that the commercials they see on Nickelodeon are designed to sell high fat, high sugar foods. What they do understand is that their favorite cartoon character loves a food, and therefore, they should too.
Technically, the government - specifically, the Federal Trade Commission - can only step in to regulate a company's advertising practices if it deems the advertisements "deceptive." But most foods being advertised to kids don't actually make claims that the products are "good for your health." So, is it fair to say the advertisements by Kellogg and Viacom are deceptive when no false claims are being made?
"Sure it is," says Stephen Gardner, Director of Litigation at CSPI. "That's the difference between deception and an outright lie. These ads are deceptive to young kids because [children] do not have the cognitive skills needed to understand that they are ads at all, rather than just a fun message from SpongeBob, or that the ads are trying to sell you something for a profit, instead of a helpful suggestion from SpongeBob."
"We have a paradox in society," says Dr. James Tillotson, professor at Tufts' Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy. "We protect kids from child labor, abuse and pornography. On one side we're protecting children, but not with marketing - it's sort of an outlier."
CSPI's attorneys say the parents and advocacy groups would settle for a commitment from the companies to change their marketing practices. CSPI points to Kraft, which has set nutritional guidelines for the foods it markets to children and prohibits advertising to children under six, as an exemplary company. And Viacom has indeed made strides to use Nickelodeon's licensed characters to promote more healthful foods. Produce distributors - Grimmway and Boskovich, for example - will soon introduce vegetable packages for baby carrots and spinach that feature Nickelodeon's recognizable TV characters.
Though the suit has not yet been filed, stay tuned for further developments. Your beloved Tony and Tiger could very soon be facing a legal battle in a courtroom near you.
Janel Ovrut is a registered dietitian and a graduate student in nutrition communication at the Friedman School. She has a BS in dietetics from Syracuse University.
Sara Wilson is co-editor of Balance.
