January 30, 2005
Is This Halliburton Place or ExxonMobil Circle?
Metro riders in Washington DC may wake up to the nightmare of corporate-sponsored train stations. (As if living in Washington DC wasn't enough of a nightmare already...)
Here's today's Associated Press article.
Metro Eyes Naming Rights, Sponsorship Deals
by Candace Smith
Imagine boarding a Metro train that's pulling into Sprint Station or seeing pylons that read Gallery Place-Chinatown, "Home of Benneton."
Like cash-strapped local governments and school districts, some transit agencies are flirting with the idea of selling naming rights and corporate sponsorships.
"That's the next generation of thought for us," said Leona Agouridis, Metro's assistant general manager for communications.
Las Vegas' Monorail counts on about $25 million in annual advertising from selling companies such as Nextel and Monster Energy drinks the rights to brand the stations and the individual trains.
Last week, New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority approved a two-year deal with two marketing firms that may lead to companies affixing their corporate names on subway stations, lines, tunnels and bridges.
"It's more a brand association," said Tom Kelly, MTA spokesman. "Like Tarrytown up here is the big IBM headquarters. Obviously, the sign would state Tarrytown station, but if they wanted to put something underneath there that said 'Home of IBM.'
Facing a $1 billion deficit by 2007, the agency is turning to other advertising besides billboards to bring in money, Kelly said.
Some Metro Board members said they would consider such deals.
"Like New York City, we need the money," said Board member and District of Columbia Councilman Jim Graham. Metro is facing a projected $42 million deficit in 2006 and a $31 million gap in 2007.
The new chairman of the board said he's open to the idea, but foresees controversy.
"I imagine some would take umbrage to coming to Victoria Secret Station, so if we went down that path, I think it'd have to be with great previous review," said Dana Kauffman of Fairfax County, Va.
Metro officials said for now, they're focused on rolling out ads wrapped around subway cars, installing televisions in trains and buses, playing silent commercials in train tunnels and installing automatic teller machines in rail stations. Riders saw bus wraps, more banners and signs in stations and on rail cars last year. The rest of advertising will appear this year, Agouridis said. The board approved the plan last year with the hope that it would eventually generate nearly $5 million annually.
The New York contract called for the marketing firms to pocket 15 percent of ad revenue if the agency made $30 million and 22.5 percent if they make $150 million or more.
But advertising experts question whether selling the naming rights and sponsorships in transit systems would generate the tens of millions of dollars that have been won in sports stadium contracts.
"One of the larger cities might be able to pull it off, but it's doubtful," said Dean Bonham, who's negotiated ten stadium deals. He said a company can reach millions of people in multiple ways if its name is on a sports and entertainment arena compared to a subway system.
"You're not going to have the emotional attachment. You don't have the television, the radio. You may have publications, but it's not going to be integrated across a lot mediums," Bonham said.
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 07:35 PM | Comments (1)
January 28, 2005
Kids Bowled Over by the Ads
"Consider the combination of unparalleled hoopla surrounding the Super Bowl commercials themselves mixed with the National Football League and networks shamelessly peddling products during the game and commentary," writes Ralph Nader. "It is without question that given the effectiveness of targeted advertising, the overabundance of commercialized air-time and the nature of the products being pushed, widespread harm is being done to exploitable young viewers."
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 07:19 PM | Comments (0)
January 26, 2005
A Sign of Despair from the Ad Industry
The Wall Street Journal reports today that General Mills, Kraft, Kellogg and some ad groups have founded the Alliance for American Advertising, to stand up for corporations supposed "right" to advertise to children.
This is good news. It's a sign that our movement is growing stronger. The industries are greatly worried that limits on the advertising of junk food may eventually lead to broader limits on marketing to children and restrictions on the speech “rights” of corporations, including their supposed “rights” to do telemarketing, to spam, and to advertise tobacco, gambling and pharmaceutical drugs.
This is one of the clearest signs of the crumbling of the commercial speech doctrine.
Here's today's Wall Street Journal article:
Divided, Companies Fight For Right to Plug Kids' Food
By Sarah Ellison
Under pressure from legislators and advocacy groups to curb advertising to children, food companies and ad agencies have created a lobbying group to defend the right to advertise to kids.
The new group, the Alliance for American Advertising, is the most ambitious effort yet to deflect government regulation or other intervention in food advertising aimed at kids, which critics link to high rates of childhood obesity.
The alliance includes three giant food companies -- General Mills Inc., Kellogg Co. and Kraft Foods Inc. -- which also rank as the top three advertisers of packaged-foods to children, by virtue of their breakfast cereals, with combined annual spending on kids' ads that approaches $380 million in the U.S. Other alliance members include the American Association of Advertising Agencies, the Association of National Advertisers and the Grocery Manufacturers of America.
The alliance's purpose, according to Wally Snyder, president and chief of the American Advertising Federation, another alliance member, is to defend the industry's First Amendment rights to advertise to children and to promote its willingness to police itself. Some members have been meeting on and off for months, although the group has come together formally only in the past week or so.
The alliance is wading into territory most food companies have taken pains to avoid. In a one-page position statement, the alliance disputes that there is a link between advertising and childhood obesity. "There is not a correlation between advertising trends and recent childhood obesity trends," according to the statement. The document cites former Federal Trade Commission Chairman Timothy J. Muris, who said advertising bans are "impractical, illegal and ineffective." It also cites two separate bills introduced last year, one by Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin, of Iowa, the other by Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy, of Massachusetts, warning that "greater restrictions on advertising to children would be difficult legally to design or implement, and ineffective in combating obesity."
Mr. Snyder says the alliance will focus on collecting research that examines whether advertising and childhood obesity are linked. "There have been all kinds of allegations," he says. "We just want to get the facts out there."
While the alliance members all want to fend off government regulation, there are already divisions forming over tactics. Earlier this month, Kraft announced that it would stop running print, radio and TV advertising for products such as Oreos and Chips Ahoy! aimed at 6- to 11-year-olds. Its strategy is similar to the one its 84%-owner, Altria Group Inc., has followed for Philip Morris in the tobacco industry, calling for more restrictive measures than the rest of the industry was willing to accept.
But the other members may want to take a harder line against ad limits, and some worry Kraft's move can be construed as a tacit admission of responsibility for rising obesity.
Marybeth Thorsgaard, a spokeswoman for General Mills, says that instead of a ban on advertising to children of a certain age, "we talk about balanced moderation and exercise." She added that the company follows the advertising guidelines set out by the Children's Advertising Review Unit (CARU), a small industry group that monitors children's advertising and which is part of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. Those guidelines say food companies should advertise truthfully and accurately to children and should use appropriate messages that children should understand. It doesn't lay out specific age restrictions for advertising to children. A spokeswoman says Kellogg follows CARU's guidelines.
Late last year, even as Kraft was finalizing its decision to curtail its kids ads, it agreed to join General Mills and Kellogg in the industrywide alliance. "Kraft is committed to implementing its new advertising initiative whether or not other companies adopt similar approaches," says Mark Berlind, Kraft's executive vice president for corporate affairs. "We want to work with the rest of the industry to find ways to strengthen self-regulation."
Advertising to kids has become such a hot potato for the $500 billion food industry that several food industry rivals, including Kraft, General Mills, Pepsico Inc. and McDonald's Corp., are attending a forum to air the issues related to obesity and advertising. Set for tomorrow in Washington, the gathering is being sponsored by the government-affiliated Institute of Medicine and will include marketing firms and child psychologists.
The food industry's effort to prevent legislation and potential litigation in some ways echoes earlier efforts by the tobacco and alcohol industries to prevent federal restrictions of their products.
The spirits industry voluntarily stopped advertising liquor on network television in the late 1940s. And in 1969, Congress passed legislation banning cigarette ads on electronic media, including TV. The tobacco industry embraced the ban because otherwise health advocates would have been entitled to equal air time to counter the message of cigarette ads.
Elizabeth Lascoutx, CARU's director, says big food companies often change their ads to comply with the unit's guidelines, a sign that the group can change their behavior. But some critics wonder if CARU, with a small legal staff, has the firepower to go up against the hundreds of ads the food industry produces each year.
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 07:57 AM | Comments (0)
January 22, 2005
Take Action: Remove the Junk Food Marketers from School
Across the country, parents and health professionals are expelling junk food and soda pop marketers from schools. We've seen statewide victories in Arkansas, California, Maine and Texas, and in cities such as Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Nashville, Oakland, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Seattle.
We want to build on these victories -- and you can help. Most state legislatures convene early this year. Now is the right time to tell your state legislators to prevent childhood obesity by removing junk food marketers from schools.
The Childhood Obesity Prevention Agenda would ban the marketing and sale of junk food in schools. It would ban Channel One (which advertises for junk food in schools), and reward schools that exceed federal nutrition standards. Tell your governor and state legislators to implement it in your state. Click here to email them: http://actionstudio.org/?go=1087
The Childhood Obesity Prevention Agenda has been endorsed by leading authors, scientists and obesity experts from Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Stanford, Yale and other major research institutions, including Lawrence Cheskin (Director, Johns Hopkins Weight Management Center); Frances Moore Lappe (author, Diet for a Small Planet); Marion Nestle (author, Food Politics); Alvin Poussaint (Harvard Medical School); Walter Willett (Harvard School of Public Health).
It has also been endorsed by the American College of Preventive Medicine, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Eagle Forum, Green Party of the United States, Organic Consumers Association, Yale Prevention Research Center, and the Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, and New Mexico Public Health Associations.
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 04:54 PM | Comments (1)
January 20, 2005
You've Got One Year to Stop -- Or Else
Our hero of the day, EU Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou, told the Financial Times today "I would like to see the [food] industry not advertising to children." If they don't stop in a year, "we will proceed to legislation."
Someday, we'll have tough-talking public health heroes in the US federal government too, instead of the current reign of wimps.
Today's Financial Times article is below.
Brussels warns on junk food: Industry given year to stop targeting children: Obesity 'a European problem': Commission ready to legislate if no progress is made
by John Mason and George Parker
The food industry has been given a year to stop advertising junk food to children and improve product labelling or face legislation in the European Union.
Markos Kyprianou, EU health and consumer affairs commissioner, warned in a Financial Times interview that urgent action was needed to tackle Europe's obesity problem, particularly among the young.
Mr Kyprianou believed self-regulation in the food industry was the quickest and most effective way to tackle the problem. But he warned the European Commission would resort to legislation if progress proved disappointing.
He said: "The signs from the industry are very encouraging, very positive. But if this doesn't produce satisfactory results, we will proceed to legislation."
The Commission can initiate legislation using rules covering the EU single market - under which it recently banned newspaper tobacco advertising - or on consumer protection grounds.
Brussels also wants to encourage initiatives to promote healthy lifestyles, involving national governments, the food industry and health bodies.
Mr Kyprianou said that until recently Europe "considered obesity to be a US problem . .. we made fun of Americans in a way. It is a European problem now".
A recent report showed the condition was a problem across Europe, worse in some southern countries normally associated with a healthy Mediterranean lifestyle than in the north. It found that 36 per cent of nine-year-olds in Italy were obese.
The CIAA, the food industry's umbrella group in Europe, said it was already working with the Commission to develop new proposals for more rigorous advertising and labelling regimes.
"There is a need for improvement but there is no magical solution for doing this in practical terms," it said, adding it would be pressing for self-regulation rather than legislation.
The US food industry is already changing its practices in response to pressure from health campaigners. Kraft Foods said last week it would stop marketing products such as popular Oreo biscuits directly to children.
Mr Kyprianou said he wanted other companies that sell products with high fat, sugar or salt content to follow suit. "I would like to see the industry not advertising directly to children any more," he said.
He also urged food manufacturers to adopt clearer labelling "more easily understood by a consumer who doesn't have a PhD in chemistry".
The Cypriot commissioner will announce in March a new "platform" with the food industry to agree the new self-regulatory standards, which he hoped would produce commitments by the end of this year or early next.
Initiatives are being discussed in the UK to cut television advertising of junk food directed at children.
A colour-coded labelling system has also been proposed although many in the industry have criticised this for being misleading and over-simple.
The obesity problem has been recognised by the UK industry for some years but manufacturers and retailers have still been surprised at the speed the issue has risen up the political agenda over the past 18 months. The industry backs voluntary reforms but has said progress is likely to be gradual.
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 06:27 PM | Comments (0)
January 19, 2005
Rail Against Naming Rights for NYC Subways
New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority has hired two consulting firms to sell naming rights to New York's subways, brigdes and tunnels.
It's time for NY Governor George Pataki to stand up for the link between civic names and civic virtue. Does he really believe we should rename the Church Ave. station after the next Enron?
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 12:40 PM | Comments (0)
January 18, 2005
Tell the Theater Chain CEO's: Stop the Pre-Movie Ads
Are you tired of being held hostage at the movie theater? Click here to take action.
Are you fed up with paying too much for a movie ticket, and then being forced to watch pre-movie commercials?
Most Americans are. According to an InsightExpress poll released on November 17th, 53% of moviegoers want movie theaters to stop running pre-movie commercials, and 27% say that the ads "will lead them to decrease the number of trips they take to the theater."
Problem is: the five largest movie theater chains all show pre-movie commercials.
It's time to send a clear message to movie theater CEOs who have no respect for their paying customers.
Here's what you can do:
1) Send an email directly to the CEOs of the five largest movie theater chains, telling them to stop running pre-movie ads. Click here: http://actionstudio.org/?go=1097.
2) Avoid theaters that show pre-movie ads. Don't see movies at Regal, AMC, Cinemark, Carmike, Loews and National Amusements. They all run pre-movie ads. Century Theaters doesn't. (It's probably best to go to an independent theater.)
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 02:42 PM | Comments (0)
January 13, 2005
Swann Song
Today, Lynn Swann, chair of The President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, appeared at a news conference with National Automatic Merchandising Association (NAMA) to plead for programs to stop schools from kicking vending machines out of school.
If President Bush really means what he says about reducing childhood obesity, he should fire Swann immediately.
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 06:07 PM | Comments (0)
January 12, 2005
Kraft Blinks -- Who's Next?
In a tacit admission that its advertising promotes childhood obesity, Kraft annouced that it would stop marketing foods of low nutritional value to children 6-12 years of age.
This is a good first step, but, if they are serious, they should stop marketing to children under 18.
Kraft's decision is really good news because will make it harder for companies like M&M/Mars, General Mills and Kellogs to advertise junk food to children.
Posted by Gary Ruskin at 01:03 PM | Comments (0)
