If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   The reason your kid always wants the sugary cereals isn't due to commercials or taste; it's due to the fact the cereal box has a life-size face on it with eyes staring at a 9.6 degree angle, which is perfect to make eye contact with children   (cnbc.com) divider line 49
    More: PSA, shmeat  
•       •       •

3613 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Apr 2014 at 10:16 AM (19 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-04 10:19:19 AM
img1.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-04-04 10:19:54 AM
I wonder if the same reason I like the POV porn?  That always looks down too? Pretty creepy indeed.
 
2014-04-04 10:20:30 AM
As someone else mentioned: If you display them as being pointed down then they're pointed down regardless of where you are so kids would still see the eyes pointed down.
 
2014-04-04 10:20:44 AM
Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with the words "chocolate", "cinnamon", "honey" or "frosted".
 
2014-04-04 10:22:37 AM
This doesn't make sense to me, because if the image isn't looking at "you" from one angle, it won't be looking at "you" from any angle then.
 
2014-04-04 10:22:45 AM
This just in:  Kids love cartoon characters, and companies have been using them to sell products like breakfast cereal since it was invented.


durbnpoisn.comli.com

What I find REALLY absurd about this is that someone did a study on it.  A study that proves what the advertiser's intentions were all along.  In other words, the people designing those boxes KNEW what they were doing.  You'd almost think it was an intentionally effective advertising gimmick.
 
2014-04-04 10:26:31 AM
img.fark.net
If they put this image on the box I would eat their sugary cereal until my teeth rotted away.
 
2014-04-04 10:29:19 AM

Agnes Gonxha's Confidant: As someone else mentioned: If you display them as being pointed down then they're pointed down regardless of where you are so kids would still see the eyes pointed down.


I think the idea is that the characters are looking at the kids from the parent's point of view.  They are the ones with the money after all.  So the psychological impact is something like, "the kid and the character appear to be looking at each other.   I must buy this cereal."
 
2014-04-04 10:32:03 AM
TFA: " the perfect angle to make eye contact with a child standing in the aisle"

assuming we know the height of the child, the height of the shelf, the distance of the child from the shelf, whether the child is in the cart or not, etc. To say nothing of whether the eyes are looking laterally, or the child is positioned laterally...

Why not just say "they're looking down so they're *more likely* to be looking at the child?" Because that's all they tested when they put the "perfect" angle up against the same face with eyes looking straight ahead. Trying to pass off "9.6 degrees" as a "perfect angle" makes the author sound like an idiot. or a rube. or an idiot rube.

And beside all that, the kids want the sugary cereal because of the sugar. You can put cereal in nondescript containers and they'll prefer the sweeter food. It's kind of an evolutionary _thing_.
The branding might help make them prefer one sugary cereal to another, but if all it took was cartoon eyes looking slightly down, vegetables would come in such packaging and parents would be showering gifts on the brain trust who connected those dots.
 
2014-04-04 10:34:44 AM

Monkey: Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with the words "chocolate", "cinnamon", "honey" or "frosted".


I liked it when they were honest.


2.bp.blogspot.com
theharriedmom.com

d3hjf51r9j54j7.cloudfront.net

www.mrbreakfast.com

www.mrbreakfast.com 

I don't have that "resizing" thing down. Mea Culpa.
 
2014-04-04 10:38:11 AM
"They... they drew him at a downward angle?"
"It means there were two artists. Now, now, stay with me..."
 
2014-04-04 10:38:28 AM
I read that as surgery serials and was thinking of Marcus Welby, MD.

/off to yell at clouds
//onion on my belt, that is the fashion
///off my lawn
 
2014-04-04 10:40:35 AM
"Sugar Bits" only have 6g's of sugar.  Damn, when I was a kid I wouldn't even get out of bed unless I had some 10+ g's of high test stuff laying around.
 
2014-04-04 10:44:06 AM
Well no wonder my cereal launch failed... my illustrator used a 9.4 degree angle.
 
hej
2014-04-04 10:46:48 AM
Good thing I don't just go buying whatever the hell my kid wants when I'm at the store.
 
2014-04-04 10:48:49 AM

devilEther: [img.fark.net image 450x420]
If they put this image on the box I would eat their sugary cereal until my teeth rotted away.


Do you buy a lot of women's magazines like Cosmo? That's pretty much the cover of all the ones I see in the grocery store checkout lane.
 
2014-04-04 10:50:27 AM
I'm just wondering how they calculated the angle. To my mind, it seems you's have to have an actual, three-dimensional roughly spherical eyeball, then calculate the "downward-looking" angle based on a horizontal axis through the center. How do you do that with two-dimensional, non-spherical cartoon eyes?
 
2014-04-04 10:54:38 AM

RedfordRenegade: "Sugar Bits" only have 6g's of sugar.  Damn, when I was a kid I wouldn't even get out of bed unless I had some 10+ g's of high test stuff laying around.


Maybe they sugar-coated dog food or something to lower the carb count.
 
2014-04-04 10:56:26 AM

hej: Good thing I don't just go buying whatever the hell my kid wants when I'm at the store.


I don't know how old your kid is, but I can tell you that never seems to stop.
My daughter is almost 13.  If she even gets a hint that I'm going to the store, she's like, "what'ya gonna get for me?!"
 
2014-04-04 10:57:21 AM

durbnpoisn: hej: Good thing I don't just go buying whatever the hell my kid wants when I'm at the store.

I don't know how old your kid is, but I can tell you that never seems to stop.
My daughter is almost 13.  If she even gets a hint that I'm going to the store, she's like, "what'ya gonna get for me?!"


"Dust and pain."
 
2014-04-04 10:57:54 AM
Would it work on these kids?
www.trendygifs.com
 
2014-04-04 11:01:49 AM
My kids will turn down every sugary cereal for plain Cheerios.  Even I can't eat plain Cheerios (I get honey-nut Cheerios for my husband and myself), but they won't eat it.

Now, of course, they beg for candy and chocolate the rest of the day, but at least I don't have to fight about breakfast with them.
 
2014-04-04 11:02:39 AM

Monkey: Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with the words "chocolate", "cinnamon", "honey" or "frosted".


Correct, it doesn't.
 
2014-04-04 11:08:35 AM

EdgeRunner: devilEther: [img.fark.net image 450x420]
If they put this image on the box I would eat their sugary cereal until my teeth rotted away.

Do you buy a lot of women's magazines like Cosmo? That's pretty much the cover of all the ones I see in the grocery store checkout lane.


That must be why I keep going back to the grocery store.
 
2014-04-04 11:12:36 AM
cockingasnook.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-04-04 11:14:39 AM
I've worked at a grocery store. If this alleged "study" were valid, that would mean that kids have to take multiple passes through an aisle at multiple levels. Sorry, but no kid who is walking is so short as to be below the boxes of sugar on the bottom shelf.
 
2014-04-04 11:15:10 AM

devilEther: If they put this image on the box I would eat their sugary cereal until my teeth rotted away.


I'd probably even eat the box.
 
2014-04-04 11:39:42 AM

flynn80: devilEther: If they put this image on the box I would eat their sugary cereal until my teeth rotted away.

I'd probably even eat the box.


i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2014-04-04 11:41:24 AM
You can tell that the sugar content is low from the angle of the eyes.

img.fark.net
 
2014-04-04 11:42:47 AM

flynn80: devilEther: If they put this image on the box I would eat their sugary cereal until my teeth rotted away.

I'd probably even eat the box.


cdn-usa.gagbay.com
 
2014-04-04 11:43:04 AM
Bullshiat.  Yeah, the eyes have nothing to do with "Looking at the child", and everything to do with looking "normal" or "connective".  Eyes looking straight ahead look disconnected, aloof, distant...not inviting.
 
2014-04-04 11:47:01 AM
all the cereal I begged for when i was a kid I no longer want as an adult.

I'll sometimes buy a box of fruit loops but end up throwing it out.

I miss Team Flakes.
 
2014-04-04 11:48:20 AM

ftfa

parents should think about not taking their children down the cereal aisle.

Correction
parents should learn to say "no" to their children.
 
2014-04-04 12:11:00 PM
In before...
img.fark.net

img.fark.net

img.fark.net

img.fark.net
 
2014-04-04 12:12:16 PM
i19.photobucket.com

Apparently a powerful mix of hypnotism and insensibility. With extra voter fraud ..
 
2014-04-04 12:30:40 PM
I wonder what the researchers would make of this...

img.fark.net
"Buy this cereal, or Mr. Spock will MELT YOUR FACE OFF."
 
2014-04-04 12:36:47 PM

litespeed74: all the cereal I begged for when i was a kid I no longer want as an adult.

I'll sometimes buy a box of fruit loops but end up throwing it out.

I miss Team Flakes.


In autumn, I have an irresistible urge to buy "Boo-Berry", which is only offered then. It was a favorite cereal as a kid, though I'm mostly now a "Raisin Bran" man.
 
2014-04-04 12:47:54 PM

buckler: Monkey: Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with the words "chocolate", "cinnamon", "honey" or "frosted".

I liked it when they were honest.


[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x804]
[theharriedmom.com image 300x400]

[d3hjf51r9j54j7.cloudfront.net image 844x791]

[www.mrbreakfast.com image 312x435]

[www.mrbreakfast.com image 323x417] 

I don't have that "resizing" thing down. Mea Culpa.


There was a time before our current notions of nutrition when sugar was considered healthy, believe it or not.  You'll see some vintage boxes extolling the virtues of the energy it gave kids to get the day going.
 
2014-04-04 01:03:17 PM
When I was a kid I could pick one sweet cereal a month,it always came down to who had the best prize in the box. Still eat cap'n crunch now though.42 yrs old.
 
2014-04-04 01:08:25 PM
It's not even that I don't want the cereals I had as a kid, but they don't even make them anymore.

Donkey Kong was like Cap'n Crunch, but was barrels. And it was awesome. As was Nerds cereal, even though it was the same idea as mario/zelda cereal. Pac-Man cereal was okay. Batman cereal was good, too! Also, GI Joe Action Stars.
 
2014-04-04 01:13:06 PM
I taught my 2 year old to say "They're great!" while sticking up his finger.

He does it now whenever we pass Tony the Tiger in the cereal aisle

It's quite cute

That is all

/parents buy the cereal, not the kids
 
2014-04-04 01:13:25 PM
Dont be farking stupid its not any one specific thing. Its a farking cacophony of marketing research and chemistry designed to specifically get inside your child.
 
2014-04-04 01:23:31 PM

TheOriginalEd: Its a farking cacophony of marketing research and chemistry designed to specifically get inside your child


Pedobear,inc?
 
2014-04-04 01:38:18 PM
Grape nuts, because I hate myself
 
2014-04-04 01:40:15 PM
Sigh....this kind of nonsense is why  I have pretty much lost faith in "Science" these days. Any old nonsense passes for 'science' these days.  They are leaping to all sorts of conclusions bases on their assumptions.

 First of all, these wankers assume that the kids get to make the buying decisions. Nope. Mom does.   In Japan, beer packaging in grocery stores is aimed at catching the attention of  Mom, cause she does the shopping.

Next they leap to assumptions on how the kids feel about the boxes based on their survey data.  Increased trust in a face? How about this idea: Humans, like animals, don't like faces that stare at them. Staring is perceived as threatening. Looking downward is non threatening....to mom who is doing the shopping.

Yeah, I am drawing different conclusions from the data, based on -my- assumptions but I will bet money, my theory is just as statistically as what has been presented as SCIENCE - you don't dare question it - SCIENCE
 
2014-04-04 02:02:05 PM

DrunkWithImpotence: buckler: Monkey: Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with the words "chocolate", "cinnamon", "honey" or "frosted".

I liked it when they were honest.


[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x804]
[theharriedmom.com image 300x400]

[d3hjf51r9j54j7.cloudfront.net image 844x791]

[www.mrbreakfast.com image 312x435]

[www.mrbreakfast.com image 323x417]

I don't have that "resizing" thing down. Mea Culpa.

There was a time before our current notions of nutrition when sugar was considered healthy, believe it or not.  You'll see some vintage boxes extolling the virtues of the energy it gave kids to get the day going.


Well, back then kids needed the energy for their shift at the mine.

Also:
img.fark.net

WTF?
"Hey, Art Department, we need a cartoon character for Frosted Sugar Stars. What have you got?"

Um...tiger? Been done. Rabbit? Cliche.
I know! A GOAT WITCH!

/I know it says, "Hillbilly Goat" but that includes just as much whatthefarkery
 
2014-04-04 04:21:33 PM
So, when you look at a one-dimensional image of a face looking down, and you get below it, it's then looking directly at you? It's not just a view from a different angle of a face looking down?

Huh...
 
hej
2014-04-04 04:31:54 PM

RembrandtQEinstein: Grape nuts, because I hate myself love chewing gravel

 
2014-04-04 08:07:56 PM
img.fark.netmy childhood favourite.
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report