News
Soap box - have your say on cartoons on packaging
Which? last week criticised the use of cartoon characters in packaging design aimed at children.
In a report, the consumer organisation took particular exception to on-pack promotions by sweet brand Haribo and cereals giant Kellogg’s.
Read our story on the report here, or click through here to download the full report from Which?
Soap Box is the industry's opportunity to respond to reports like this one and to debate the issues we all face. You will need to register to be able to leave comments on the website - it only takes a few minutes, and you are free to register under your own name or a pseudonym.
What do you think of the findings? Should packaging designers stop using cartoon characters? What are the alternatives? Log in and let us know your views below.
Cartoons: should they be used on children's products?
Advertisement
Comments
James Smith - 23 July 2008
I haven't read the full report so it's hard to say, but this sounds surprising. Packaging design has a role to play in the battle against obesity, but surely that role is a small one. Parents obviously are key to this, both in terms of nutrition and making sure their kids lead an active life. Moreover, why isn't the Government under attack over obesity? If PE was a higher priority in schools and playing fields had not been sold for housing developments the obesity problem would be nothing on what it is today.
Josh Brooks - 23 July 2008
Posted on behalf of Julie Elliott
Do none of these children have parents who take any interest in their well-being? Surely they can advise their offspring about eating cereals containing less sugar, salt and fat.
Josh Brooks - 23 July 2008
Posted on behalf of Stephen Wilkins, Child Safe Packaging Group
Communicating information about contents and generating a desire to purchase is a major part of packaging's task. In this regard packaging is the last link in the marketing communication chain. It is not inherently wrong to 'advertise to children' neither is it wrong to brand build a range children's food by creating desire amongst children and prompting them to ask parents to purchase.
Using cartoons and character merchandising is an excellent way of talking to children and building children's brands.
But we must not overdo it. If we adhere to the Code of Advertising Practice which, amongst other things says, that children should not be encouraged to eat late at night and should not be persuaded to replace main meals with an all day diet of snack foods(CAP section 47), then we are acting as responsible packaging producers. Using the code as a benchmark, all products /pack designs should be evaluated on their merits.
Whilst Which? is perfectly entitled to express its opinions, it would in my own view be quite wrong to introduce statutory curbs on the way pack designs address children. As they grow up children learn about healthy eating, or not, from parents, school and peer groups. Hiding sugar coated cereals in brown paper packets will not help.
Josh Brooks - 23 July 2008
Posted on behalf of Des King
God help us; the Puritans are back and they're writing the script for Loony Tunes. I can remember when Which? was all about steering you towards the best value product. Now it's doling out advice on how it should be marketed. Who or what else should they draft in to help flog the sweet stuff? Follow this line of thought far enough and next thing you know, confectionery will be obliged to display graphics of obese five year-olds on the wrapper. The fact of the matter is whether it's got Cbeebies characters crawling all over it or comes in a matt grey pack, some children will eat more sweets than is good for them. I can't substantiate this and actually couldn't be bothered to try, but it's a fair bet that drafting in the Disney brigade isn't going to turn sprouts into an irresitable lure for kids cruising the veg counter. Packaging is the come-on, but consumerism is the main issue. Which? is part of that debate, and if truth be told - and no doubt with the best of intentions - has probably done plenty on its own account to encourage credit debt by extolling the virtues of a whole raft of products and gizmos that in the current climate might equally be said to add up to a financially 'less healthy option'.
Josh Brooks - 23 July 2008
Posted on behalf of Matt Whipp
Oh get over yourselves. Of course companies will use ideas that appeal to kids on products for kids. If you want to protect our fatty little darlings you need mandates on the contents, not the packaging.
Walter Lewis - 24 July 2008
Walter Lewis, Faraday Packaging Partnership
Do we really want to be give such stuff credibility by debating it. Anyone with half a brain can see its an issue about whether you should advertise to children and not about cartoons on packaging.
Kate Hannah - 25 July 2008
Which? have told us they are pleased with the changes we’ve made in the way we market our products. All our promotions now focus on family entertainment, activity and education. In the UK, we are not using either third-party licensed characters to market to children or toy inserts in cereal boxes. Kellogg has also implemented enhanced global marketing guidelines limiting our use of licensed properties in marketing to children.
With 1 in 5 children skipping breakfast, we are more concerned with those not having the nutritious start to the day and stopping at corner shops on the way to school instead. Breakfast cereals account for nearly half of calcium consumption amongst kids in the UK and a quarter of their daily intake of vitamins and minerals, cereals remain a nutritious and healthy way to start the day.
Tina Can - 25 July 2008
I don't remember doing the weekly shop when I was a child. Surely it should be up to the parents to ensure their children eat a healthy diet?
To post comments please log in here