When I was reading the article I believe I was an oppositional reader. Every sentence I read I found I was shaking my head. How can we go about blaming large corporations for the way our children are spoiled? Let me give you this scenario:
A farmer brings a basket of tomatoes to the market to sell. In less then 2 hours he sells out. As he is packing up other shoppers approach him and are upset that they missed out on his red ripe tomatoes. He feels bad and leaves. The following week he brings two baskets of tomatoes. Before he even sets up his stand there is a line of people waiting to buy them. Some people even begin pushing. Still he sells out. Now what should the farmer do to provide for his family and make the shoppers happy? Should he continue to bring more and more tomatoes or should he just bring the same amount every week. You can blame the corporations all you want for the vast products they put out and marketing to certain age groups, but that is marketing. It reminds me of the whole Cabbage Patch debacle, when there isn't enough of a product people get pissed and go a little crazy. I don't know if anyone understands what I am trying to say but we can't keep blaming everyone else for how the world is we have helped to make it like this.
One parent commented that there is no way to keep your child away from the products and advetising unless they are homeschooled. But it is the parents like me who throw their daughter not just a spongebob party but Elmo was involved too.
There were some things that were amazing in the article such as Disney hiring an anthropologist to go through kids closets and find out what they really want. But the fact is there is a parent acceting the 75 dollars for the kid to get interviewed. We all made fun of the lady who put her kid on ebay in a t-shirt saying put your advertisement here. How horrible of that woman. Then you see all the children walking around with Gap across there chest or Abercrombie on their ass. Is there really a difference?
No comments:
Post a Comment