April, 09 2009, 04:40pm EDT
![Fairplay](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012682/origin.jpg)
CCFC to Nickelodeon: Did You Approve the SpongeBob SquareButt Burger King Commercial?
The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood is asking whether
Nickelodeon Television President Cyma Zarghami approved the controversial
SpongeBob SquareButt television commercial. More than 2,600 CCFC
members have written to Nickelodeon and Burger King in the past 48 hours urging
the companies to pull the ad which features King, the Burger King mascot, singing
a remix of Sir Mix-A-Lot's 1990's hit song, "Baby Got
Back" with the new lyrics, "I like square butts and I cannot
lie." The ad shows images of The King singing in front of women
shaking their behind
BOSTON
The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood is asking whether
Nickelodeon Television President Cyma Zarghami approved the controversial
SpongeBob SquareButt television commercial. More than 2,600 CCFC
members have written to Nickelodeon and Burger King in the past 48 hours urging
the companies to pull the ad which features King, the Burger King mascot, singing
a remix of Sir Mix-A-Lot's 1990's hit song, "Baby Got
Back" with the new lyrics, "I like square butts and I cannot
lie." The ad shows images of The King singing in front of women
shaking their behinds for the camera intercut with images of SpongeBob dancing
along.
"Parents deserve to know whether Nickelodeon-the most
popular children's television network-signed off on the use of
SpongeBob in a commercial that celebrates lechery and objectifies women,"
said CCFC director Dr. Susan Linn.
Yesterday, Burger King responded to criticisms by disingenuously
claiming that the ad -which is for Kids Meals and features perhaps
the most popular children's television character - was aimed at
adults. The ad ran during Monday Nights Men's NCAA Championship,
which aired at 6:00 pm on the West
Coast. Nickelodeon has yet to respond publicly.
CCFC's letter to Nickelodeon is below:
Ms. Cyma Zarghami, President
Nickelodeon Television
1515 Broadway
New York, NY
10036
SENT VIA FAX
Dear Ms. Zarghami,
We are writing to ask whether you or anyone at Nickelodeon approved the
new "SpongeBob SquareButt" television commercial that is currently
airing for Burger King Kids Meals. As you are probably aware, more than
2,600 members of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood have asked
Nickelodeon and Burger King to pull the commercial. It's bad enough
when a character popular with children, like SpongeBob SquarePants, is used to
promote junk food, but it's absolutely egregious when that character
simultaneously promotes objectified, sexualized images of women.
Yesterday, Burger King responded via a marketing trade publication to
complaints about the ad. While their response was disingenuous -
they claimed the ad for Kids Meals featuring SpongeBob was aimed at adults
- at least they responded. We suspect Burger King, which positions
itself as an edgier alternative to other fast food chains, actually welcomes
the publicity from this controversy.
But we wonder why a children's television station like Nickelodeon
would want to link one of its most popular and profitable characters to this sort
of lechery and objectification of women. That's why we are asking
if you approved the use of SpongeBob in this commercial (and the longer
Internet viral video, which is frankly even more disturbing).
If you did - and do - approve, is this part of a new trend
at Nickelodeon? Is there a plan at Nickelodeon to make your most famous
characters edgier in order to maintain their appeal to children as they grow
up? We can't help but notice the connection between this ad and the
new tween Dora doll, which will distinguish itself from earlier incarnations of
Dora by focusing on fashion and her appearance. We think parents of
children who watch your programming would appreciate hearing answers to these
questions.
We are attaching an email from the mother of two young children who
were watching the NCAA championship when the ad was aired. We look
forward to your response, and would be happy to discuss our members concerns
with you.
Sincerely,
Susan Linn Josh
Golin
Director, CCFC Associate
Director, CCFC
From: Mindy Holohan [mailto:xxxxxxx@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 12:38 PM
To: ccfc
Subject: Re: Tell Nick and Burger King: SpongeBob and Sexualization Don't Mix
I can not express how happy I am to see the immediate action being taken in response to this ad. When we viewed it during the game, I said to my husband that the ad illustrates exactly how horribly mixed up and misdirected advertising has become. My husband is currently a doctoral student at Michigan State University and both of my parents are dedicated alumni. Due to these connections, our daughters ages 6 & 11 were very excited to support the Spartans and were allowed to stay up late to watch MSU in the championship game. Children all across our state were allowed to do the same. Anticipating inappropriate advertising, we chose to take some of the edge off by muting the commercials. Unfortunately, the sexual innuendo and cross-promotional content of the Burger King/Sponge Bob ad came through loud and clear, even without the soundtrack.
As a Michigan resident and parent, I feel incredibly violated by the tactics of Burger King and Nickelodeon. They obviously knew that children would be watching the game or else they would not have invested in such valuable ad space to promote a kids meal. The suggestiveness of the dancing and the exploitation of the female dancers is bad enough. Sexualizing a popular children's character and child-centered products is unforgivable. I am so grateful that my children are on spring break this week as I predict that this ad, above all of those that we were exposed to during the NCAA playoff game, will be the one that children are acting out and imitating in schools and with their peers over the next few days. The combination of the comical "burger king", the catchy beat, the "bootylicious" language and Sponge Bob SquarePants just about ensures that this is so. It also sets a new low for an increasingly exploitative industry that consistently demonstrates little to no respect for the wellbeing of children.
Mindy Holohan
Grand Rapids, MI
Fairplay, formerly known as Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, educates the public about commercialism's impact on kids' wellbeing and advocates for the end of child-targeted marketing. Fairplay organizes parents to hold corporations accountable for their marketing practices, advocates for policies to protect kids, and works with parents and professionals to reduce children's screen time.
LATEST NEWS
US Voter Registrations Surge as Republicans Try to Limit Ballot Access
One group said it has registered over 100,000 new voters since U.S. President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 race.
Jul 26, 2024
The group behind a popular get-out-the-vote technology platform said Friday that it's registered more than 100,000 new U.S. voters since President Joe Biden withdrew from the 2024 presidential race, a surge that came amid mounting Republican efforts to make it harder to register and vote.
Vote.org said that 84% of voters registered in the new wave are under age 35. Nearly 1 in 5 new registrees is 18 years old. Andrea Hailey, the group's CEO, said that "since 2020, we have led the largest voter registration drive in U.S. history," with more than 7.8 million people registered.
After dropping out, Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to face former Republican President Donald Trump and Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) in the November election. The new presumptive Democratic candidate has already earned endorsements from many Democrats in Congress and groups advocating on issues including climate, labor, and reproductive rights.
Vote.org's success comes as Republicans at the federal level are proposing and passing legislation creating obstacles to the ballot box.
Earlier this month, U.S. House Republicans passed Rep. Chip Roy's (R-Texas)
Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would require proof of American citizenship to vote in federal elections. Republicans claim the bill is meant to fix the virtually nonexistent "problem" of noncitizen voter fraud.
However, Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.)
slammed the bill as a "xenophobic attack" meant to silence "Black voices, brown voices, LBGTQIA+ voices, [and] young voices."
Lee said the SAVE Act underscores the need to pass her recently introduced Right to Vote Act, "which would establish the first-ever affirmative federal voting rights guarantee, ensuring every citizen may exercise their fundamental right to cast a ballot."
Earlier this year, U.S. Senate Democrats also reintroduced the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation its sponsors say will "update and restore critical safeguards of the original Voting Rights Act."
Meanwhile, Republican-controlled state legislatures and red-state governors are enacting laws imposing tough restrictions on voter registration, with violations punishable by stiff fines that critics say are meant to dissuade people from registration drives and similar efforts.
Again under the guise of preventing fraud, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis last year signed legislation limiting voter registration drives, with fines of up to $250,000 for violators.
"These draconian laws and rules are like taking a sledgehammer to hit a flea," Cecile Scoon, an attorney and president of the Florida chapter of the League of Women Voters,
toldThe New York Times in an article published Friday.
Three years after Kansas passed a law making "false representation" of an election official a crime, campaigners say it's become extremely difficult to sign up new voters.
"In 2020, even with the pandemic, we had registered nearly 10,000 Kansans to vote. Now, we haven't been able to register anyone," Davis Hammet, president of the youth voter mobilization group Loud Light, told the Times.
In Louisiana, Republican state lawmakers quietly passed legislation making it easier for election officials to toss out absentee ballots with missing details, limiting how people can mail in other voters' ballots, and restricting the ability to assist people with disabilities with their ballots.
"What we've found is that these measures have a disproportionate impact on voters with disabilities, both Black and white," NAACP Legal Defense Fund senior policy counsel Jared Evans
toldNola.com earlier this week.
"It's clear that their goal is to make it harder to vote, harder for specific communities to vote especially," Evans added. "What they don't realize is that these laws hurt white voters, too."
In Nebraska, Republican Secretary of State Bob Evnen last week
ordered county election offices to stop registering voters with past felony convictions who have not received official pardons. The move came after the state's unicameral Legislature passed a bill granting voting eligibility to felons immediately after they have completed their sentences instead of waiting two years.
"We refuse to accept thousands of Nebraskans having their voting rights stripped away," ACLU of Nebraska legal and policy fellow Jane Seu said in a statement. "We are confident in the constitutionality of these laws, and we are exploring every option to ensure that Nebraskans who have done their time can vote."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Warn Manchin-Barrasso Permitting Bill 'Is Taken Straight From Project 2025'
"You thought Project 2025 was just a threat after the election? It's actually happening *right now,*" said one climate campaigner.
Jul 26, 2024
Climate and environmental defenders on this week implored U.S. senators to block a permitting reform bill introduced this week by Sens. Joe Manchin and John Barrasso that campaigners linked to Project 2025, a conservative coalition's agenda for a far-right overhaul of the federal government.
Common Dreamsreported Monday that Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Barrasso (R-Wyo.)—respectively the chair and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee—introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) noted that although the proposal "includes several positive reforms for the accelerated development of transmission projects," it also advocates "limiting opportunities for communities to challenge projects, loosening oversight for drilling and mining projects, extending drilling permits and fast-tracking [liquified natural gas] permits, and several other provisions friendly to fossil fuel giants."
"This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
These are nearly identical policies to what's proposed in Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. The plan, which was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, calls for "unleashing all of America's energy resources," including by ending federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands; limiting investments in renewable energy; and rolling back environmental permitting restrictions for new oil, gas, and coal projects, including power plants.
While Manchin has been trying—and failing—to pass fossil fuel-friendly permitting reform legislation for years, Brett Hartl, director of public affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that his "Frankenstein legislation is taken straight from Project 2025, and it's the biggest giveaway in decades to the fossil fuel industry."
Hartl said the bill "deprives communities of the power to defend themselves and gives that power to Big Oil by making it harder for communities to challenge polluting projects in court," and "prioritizes the profits of coal barons over public health."
"And it mandates oil and gas extraction in our oceans," he continued. "The insignificant crumbs thrown at renewable energy do nothing to address the climate emergency."
"Monday was the hottest day in recorded history," Hartl noted. "It's shocking that as the climate emergency continues to break records around us, the Senate continues to fast-track the fossil fuel expansion that is killing us. This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
Hartl added that "to preserve a livable planet," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) "must squash this legislation now."
Manchin—who has said this will be his last term in office—has been a steadfast supporter of the fossil fuel industry, partly because his family owns a coal company. The senator says his permitting reform bill "will advance American energy once again to bring down prices, create domestic jobs, and allow us to continue in our role as a global energy leader."
However, Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International's U.S. manager, warned Thursday that "this bill is yet another dangerous attempt by Sen. Manchin to line the pockets of his fossil fuel donors, sacrificing communities and our climate along the way."
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else," she continued. "It would unleash more drilling on federal lands and waters, unnecessarily rush the review of proposed oil and gas export projects, and lift the Biden administration's pause on new LNG exports."
"We urge Congress to reject this proposal and commit to action that protects frontline communities from the impacts of fossil fuel development and the climate crisis," Rosenbluth added.
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else."
NRDC managing director of government affairs Alexandra Adams said Wednesday that "this bill is a giveaway for the oil and gas industry that will ramp up drilling and environmental destruction at a time when we need to be putting a hard stop to fossil fuels."
"We cannot afford to roll back so many of our bedrock environmental and community legal protections and offer a blank check to the oil and gas industry," she stressed. "We need new solutions for permitting if we are going to meet our clean energy potential and address the climate challenge. But this is not it."
"This bill would altogether be a leap backward on climate, health, and justice if passed into law," Adams added. "The Senate should reject it and look toward alternative solutions already being considered."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Nothing To Eat': War-Torn Sudan Faces Mass Famine as Military Delays Aid
Both parties in Sudan's civil war are to blame for a looming mass famine, experts say, and the military's blocking of U.N. aid at a border crossing with Chad exacerbates the problem.
Jul 26, 2024
Sudan's military is blocking United Nations aid trucks from entering at a key border crossing, causing severe disruptions in aid in a country that experts fear may be on the brink of one of the worst famines the world has seen in decades, The New York Timesreported Friday.
The border city of Adré in eastern Chad is the main international crossing into the Darfur region of Sudan, but the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the state's official military, which is engaged in a civil war with a paramilitary group called the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has refused to issue permits for U.N. trucks to enter there, as it's an RSF-controlled area.
U.S. and international officials have issued increasingly alarmed calls for steady aid access to help feed the millions of severely malnourished people in Darfur and other areas of Sudan.
Last week, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the United States ambassador to the U.N., said that the SAF's obstruction of the border was "completely unacceptable."
Both warring parties in Sudan continue to perpetrate brazen atrocities, including starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. This piece focuses on the SAF's ongoing obstruction of essential aid. The situation is catastrophic. The policy is criminal. https://t.co/FKhqQh3EI9.
— Tom Dannenbaum (@tomdannenbaum) July 26, 2024
The Sudanese who've made it out of the country and into Adré reported dire and unsafe conditions in their home country.
"We had nothing to eat," Bahja Muhakar, a Sudenese mother of three, told the Times after she crossed into Chad, following a harrowing six-day journey from Al-Fashir, a major city in Darfur. She said the family often had to live off of one shared pancake per day.
Another mother, Dahabaya Ibet, said that her 20-month-old boy had to bear witness to his grandfather being shot and killed in front of his eyes when the family home in Darfur was attacked by gunmen late last year.
Now the mothers and their families are refugees in Adré, where 200,000 Sudanese are living in an overcrowded, under-resourced transit camp.
In addition to those that have made it out of the country, there are 11 million people internally displaced within Sudan, most of whom have become displaced since the civil war began in April 2023.
An unnamed senior American official told the Times that the looming famine in Sudan could be as bad as the 2011 famine in Somalia or even the great Ethiopian famine of the 1980s.
In April, Reutersreported that people in Sudan were eating soil and leaves to survive, and The Washington Postcalled it a nation in "chaos," reporting that World Food Program trucks had been "blocked, hijacked, attacked, looted, and detained."
In late June, a coalition of U.N. agencies, aid groups, and governments warned that 755,000 people in Sudan faced famine in the coming months.
The U.S. last week announced $203 million in additional aid to Sudan—part of a $2.1 billion pledge that world leaders made in April, which some countries have not yet delivered on.
Some officials including Thomas-Greenfield, who has dubbed the situation in Sudan "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world," have called for the U.N. Security Council to allow aid delivery into the country even in the absence of SAF approval; it's believed that Russia would veto such a measure.
Sudan's civil war has seen a great deal of international interference. Amnesty International on Thursday published an investigatory briefing showing that weapons from Russia, China, Serbia, Turkey, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had been identified in the country. And The Guardian on Friday reported that the passports of Emirati citizens had been found among wreckage in Sudan, indicating the UAE may have troops or intelligence officers on the ground, though the UAE denied the accusation.
The International Service for Human Rights on Friday warned that both the SAF and RSF were engaged in wrongful killings and arrests, especially targeted at lawyers, doctors, and activists. The group called for an immediate cease-fire.
The SAF and Sudanese government figures have cast doubt on international experts' claims about famine in the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular