Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

france24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 349 posts

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#171

Post by MiguelX413 »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #144
jraph wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children are totally targeted. They will ask their parents and put pressure to buy them stuff. Maybe even the parents who don't cave in can be relieved of this. In the longer term, stuff that enters your brain as a child shapes you and lasts long. See how well how many people in their 30s remember ads of their childhood. Why would someone defend such ads anyway? I don't believe they achieve anything good for anyone e…

Its because I don't want the government, people who I've never met in person and honestly are not the most moral of individuals, making moral decisions for my children on my behalf. Even if the majority of citizens agreed that forcing their morality on the minority is the right thing to do I still disagree because individual freedom is more important than majority opinion.

What's the point of laws if not forcing morality?

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#173

Post by WillPostForFood »

saagarjha wrote: post #128
fakedang wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how you can buy British politicians for dirt cheap. In India or the US, it would take at least $100k-200k to get a single politician's attention at the bare minimum, while in the UK you can influence party positions for 25k quid.

I don't have enough experience about India to comment on that but in the US the amount of money it takes to influence a politician is quite low.

How much do you estimate it would take to get a politician to flip their view on abortion, gun control, illegal immigration, health care? Seems like if it were "quite low" you'd see politicians flipping views all the time as one side or the other channelled money to them.

What we actually see is a lot of stasis, refusal to compromise, and politicians locked in with their party, which suggests it is pretty hard to influence politicians.

Where money is effective is using it to get politicians who agree with your view elected.

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#174

Post by cma »

Karellen wrote: post #21
tomp wrote: post #12

Wow, what's wrong with burgers? I mean, certainly you can get bad meat, and maybe it's easier to conceal in a burger than in a steak, but ... how about literally all other processed meat that is invariably processed more than burgers? Salami, sausages, hot dogs, ... I personally love burger, and consider it one of the finest foods. Fortunately, there's a very easy way to know the quality of a burger - if they ask you…

> Also on the banned list are products such as chickpea or lentil-based crisps, seaweed-based snacks and Bombay mix as well as energy drinks, hamburgers and chicken nuggets. The foods mentioned in the article are not an exhaustive list of all the foods for which the government has banned advertising. It's possible they've also banned ads for salami, sausages and hot dogs, but the article didn't mention it. Probably b…

McDonald's burgers are 100% beef. What's the problem? If the bun and other parts of the burger are ultra processed, whatever that means, well, that's the same for their chicken sandwiches, right? If the problem is the salt or seasonings, why not ban ads for salty burgers over a threshold or burgers with the specific problematic seasonings?

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#175

Post by benatkin »

jsheard wrote: post #5

Can we do gambling ads next? We banned tobacco ads and then seemingly forgot the lesson that it's actually bad to let advertisers shove addictive and self-destructive products in the publics face, including to former addicts at risk of relapse.

Sarcasm I hope...

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#176

Post by laurieg »

chgs wrote: post #52
bobthepanda wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

more so in the past, there was a lot more food advertising directed at kids, because the thought was that kids could annoy their parents enough to drag the whole family to an establishment. and some marketing tricks work a lot better on children because of their social settings and general impulsiveness (e.g. "All the cool kids have Lunchables")

The milky bar kid is strong and tough The red car and the blue car had a race Turn the milk chocolatey Keep hunger locked up tip lunch I have tried to avoid adverts for 20 years, but the adverts of my childhood (not just ones aimed at kids - autoglass repair and replace, safe style do buy one get one free, dfs sale ends Sunday, ronseal quick drying wood stain does exactly what it says on the tin) The brainwashing is…

I still remember phone numbers from radio ads I heard as a kid. I don't have any phone number memorized apart from my own

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#177

Post by cma »

akira2501 wrote: post #107
Krutonium wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Canada, it's outright illegal to sell a burger medium done. If you get caught, your restaurant will be closed for a couple weeks minimum, along with a hefty fine. It must be fully cooked, or not served.

It's ground beef. The rule is you must cook it to the proper internal temperature. This is reasonable food safety. This simply precludes medium as an option. If they grind their own meat or use something like ground chuck or ground round you can get it medium.

Why is ground chuck safer than other ground beef?

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#178

Post by cma »

tomp wrote: post #129
Krutonium wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Canada, it's outright illegal to sell a burger medium done. If you get caught, your restaurant will be closed for a couple weeks minimum, along with a hefty fine. It must be fully cooked, or not served.

That doesn’t make sense. It’s beef. If you can serve a steak medium, then you can also grind the steak, cook it medium and serve it.

Then you get bacteria in the ground part, potentially, whereas a steak will be cooked on all the exposed surfaces.

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#179

Post by kd5bjo »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #157
fakedang wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how you can buy British politicians for dirt cheap. In India or the US, it would take at least $100k-200k to get a single politician's attention at the bare minimum, while in the UK you can influence party positions for 25k quid.

This is an interesting observation. Why do you think it is so much lower in UK Vs US? My guess: There are much less private donations in the national UK political system.

US congressional districts being an order of magnitude larger than UK constituencies probably has something to do with it. Also, there are significantly more MPs than representatives, so you have to swing more legislators to your side in the UK vs the US to get your pet policies adopted.

(Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_ap... , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituencies_of_the_Parliame... )

Re: UK bans daytime TV ads for cereals, muffins and burgers

#180

Post by dijksterhuis »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #144
jraph wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children are totally targeted. They will ask their parents and put pressure to buy them stuff. Maybe even the parents who don't cave in can be relieved of this. In the longer term, stuff that enters your brain as a child shapes you and lasts long. See how well how many people in their 30s remember ads of their childhood. Why would someone defend such ads anyway? I don't believe they achieve anything good for anyone e…

Its because I don't want the government, people who I've never met in person and honestly are not the most moral of individuals, making moral decisions for my children on my behalf. Even if the majority of citizens agreed that forcing their morality on the minority is the right thing to do I still disagree because individual freedom is more important than majority opinion.

> I still disagree because individual freedom is more important than majority opinion.

this read suspiciously like a stereotypical US opinion regarding individual rights vs rights of the majority.

so i went and looked through your comment history and i now i suspect even more strongly that you are US based.

> Its because I don't want the government, people who I've never met in person and honestly are not the most moral of individuals, making moral decisions for my children on my behalf.

it’s not your government doing this. you can relax.

also, we in the UK value the balance between individual rights and collective societal rights more strongly than you do. it’s our thing. if you don’t like it, it doesnt matter, you don’t live here.

Post reply on HN