I'm all for this. People pay for access to the site, then get adverts on top? Gimme a break!

Nobody expects there to be no advertising. People are shocked when they find a place without advertising nowadays. Live with it.

parents should be more concerned their child is wasting their childhood on Webkinz. If the ads for the site are any indication, it's most likely a place where growing imaginations go to die. Not the damn ads on the site.

One of the reasons parents purchase Webkinz is the expectation that the website will be free of advertising.

Riiiiiiiiight. I don't seem to remember that at all in the advertising for the toys. Who are these naive parents? It's an online game. What online game DOESN'T contain ads, unless you pay $15/month?

does anyone here know if people who actually have something worthwhile to complain about still exist?

"Campaign for a Commercial-free Childhood"

ROFLMFAO

I'm inclined to hear some opinions of parents that might have kids. Kids that love Webkinz because it's fun or cute or whatever, and love whatever Webkinz advertises, and ask Mommy and Daddy for whatever is advertised, and then cry if they don't get what they want.
There's something to be said for parents keeping an eye on their kids and those kids' web activities. But the advertising may be implemented in such a way that the parents won't necessarily catch it, and parents might not even be concerned because they're resigned to a world where advertisements are everywhere. But a lot of parents don't realize that advertising is processed differently in the minds of adults and kids. Young children haven't necessarily learned to differentiate between fiction and reality, and between advertisements and simple statements.

Or parents could do the personally responsible (and admittedly heart-breaking) thing: Take the toys from their children, divest themselves of teh cuteness, and buy some other similar product instead.

Naaaaah.

Gid bless Advertisements aimed at kids. If we didn't have them I wouldn't have a clue what to get my nephew and nieces for Christmas.

Ugh, any of these for the children people really piss me off. Not that i'm against protecting children, but protect them from things they really need protection from (i.e. - child molesters, physical or mental abuse from parents or others) not things they don't need protection from (i.e. - seeing a few commercials, video games, movies, music, ect.)

I agree with this. Advertising to children can be one of the most damaging, unethical, and absurd forms of commercialism currently practed in our society. Children are not mature enough to ignore extremely powerful advertising techniques, and these techniques often monopolize the asthetic tastes of children for years (power advertising has also been tied to poor conduct, low scores, childhood obesity, etc) . Advertising companies know the unethical conduct that takes place within their advertising and should exercise greater judgment in the first place.

You people need to realize how the minds of children are being knowingly manipulated by people whose only concern is the generation of profit. I usually couldn't give a damn less about the children, but this is one issue where a bad thing is imbedded so deeply into society that speaking out is almost neccessary.

@Pandralisk (sorry for double posting)
When you bitch and moan ads for entertainment for kids, you have gone over the edge.

If it were for games such as Gears of War, Halo 3, or Mass Effect, I could see the CCFC's complaint. Those games should never be advertised on a website for kids. However, that is not the case here. These are ads for kids entertainment, not for mature entertainment.

If they don't like it, they don't have to buy it. Maybe they should quit bitching and learn to parent their own kids.

remember all the cartoons in the 80's that were just thinly disguised 30-minute commercials? when they didn't have to trick you into hearing about a product they just came out and said "hey, buy this, idiot!" and everyone was content with that kind of advertising?

those were the days.

I have to post because this may be one of the few times I'll ever get to use this phrase, but I agree with Pandralisk.
For one, you can't just say that parents can say no to what the kids can have. Kids throw tantrums when they don't get what they want at times, and they don't always understand the concept of compromise, just the concept of 'I want!' The choice might either be a prolonged tantrum in a public place, or capitulating to their demands.
But more importantly is the ethical concerns. Young kids don't process advertising the same way. They're more likely to be completely convinced by it, and being impressioned at a young age can impact your choices for years. McDonald's didn't invent Ronald McDonald on a whim. Kids think positive things when they see clowns, and Ronald ads would create subconsious positive connotations that cannot be easily broken up. Advertising to adults is at least ethical because adults understand ads enough to know they have a choice, but advertising to kids is half a step above brainwashing.

I would have to agree with Pandralisk and Benji (minus the tantrum thing. When my kids throw tantrums, I laugh at them and then continue doing what I was doing before the tantrum)

Kids are impressionable. They have a hard time understanding that just because the tv says they will have fun playing with said toy, game etc. doesn't mean they will. They also don't understand the concept of money and when you tell the kid that you can't afford said toy, game etc. they get mad and beg harder.

It also conditions them from an early age to to be succeptable to advertisning and they will have a harder time avoiding the influence when they are older.

I may not like CCFC, but I can understand why they want to minimize the amount of advertising that children see.

I don't like advertisements anymore than the next person, but they are an ever-present aspect of human life in a free enterprise. I'd be more shocked if a chunk of my hair suddenly fell out for no immediately evident reason.

As for the exploitation of children through commercials, it doesn't make it right, but kids have been, and will continue to be, exploited in much worse ways. I'd rather worry about those than a commercial designed to, for example, make a kid feel like a loser for not having a certain toy.

@Soul

The same thing Hollywood's been doing to just about every other childhood memory I have: Raping it for profit.

Advertising is obnoxious and advertising to young children is particularly creepy. Webkinz deserves all the criticism they get if that's the road they're choosing to take.

I always liked that Consumer Reports for Kids magazine "Zillions", where they taught kids about deceptive advertising techniques and tried to make them into smart consumers. A shame that it seems to have gone away.

"and that’s when you beat their little asses."

Giving a young child a spanking once or twice as a last resort is o.k. imho but constant physical punishment when a child breaks the rules is probably one of the worst things you could do to a child. I definely agree that many parents out there are lacking in parental skills and wanting the government to take over for them, but "beating your child ass" to make them behave isn't the way to go. If anything it will make them behave worse.

How else are free sites supposed to stay up without banner ads? That's how they pay the bills.

@Benji

if one thinks a spaking is "harsh punishment" they're part of the problem of lack of discipline in children. a tantrum isn't a child saying "i want that" it's a child kicking and screaming and putting up a fuss. it is the extreme that requires a more extreme discipline.

and for as much as people scoff at Dr. David Walsh, his "Say Yes to No" book (and lectures) make a lot of sense on how to discipline children.

Obstructive and intrusive ads (popups etc.) in something you've paid for? That's worth of an ewww disirregardless of the target demographic. Still, I think CCFC are missing a crucial point here: In order for a movie to be seen by anyone at all, people need to be told it exists. The Chipmunks movie needs to be advertised *somewher* otherwise nobody would go to see it beyond passing trade and the three kids in the world who read movie magazines.

In the UK, there are guidelines and regulations about the sort of thing you can advertise around kids. Storms are kicked up if a junk food ad appears during the after-school cartoons, for instance.

@ BmK:

Well, my mum frequently smacked (or "spanked" or whatever you wanna call it) when I was a child, and now she is saying that I'm much better behaved than "most of all the other little shits" around (Yes, she has said that). I had learnt that complaining about something equates to not getting it, AND a sore ass. And I actually love her more for it, because I learnt very good values from her, by her doing that.

Compare that to my cousin who only ever gets the "Wait until your father comes home" shtick. If that doen't work, it's the "go to your room where there's toys, and stuff" thing. They don't generally work. Funnily enough, she's learned that she has to behave when mum or I are around.

BTW: Did anyone else think that the ads were going to be for things like Manhunt, etc when they read the title?

My sisters into webkinz, and it's not all that suprising that they have ads. There's no claim to the contrairy. Besides, I get ads in Madden and such, and I pay $60 for that.

Once again it cuts off my slightly brilliant post >shakes head

I think the real question here is how one views the site without bleeding to death from the eyes!

Wouldn't a more valid concern be the warping of the childrens minds because of an unrealistic games rather than annoying ads?

We should send the link about that kid whose parents sheltered him from life until he snapped to the CCFC! I'd love to see their reaction.

Damn you Popeye, damn you straight to hell!

Why is everyone defending this jackass website that has ads all over the page when people have to pay to use it? I hate online advertising, it's really annoying, time-wasting and can load my computer up with a shitload of spyware. Another thing, they aren't unfairly targeting video games, they feel the same way about tv and all other forms of media. I'm not saying the group is all that good but they aren't an anti-game group. Frankly at least in this case i think we can all agree that online advertising is really annoying even if we concede companies have a right to do it. One of the things I love about this page is what ads it has are inconspicuous and mostly just helpful links that someone who visits this page is probably going to be interested in.

I don't know a damned thing about parenting. I don't think I ever will. I haven't any intention of procreating. So I'm not going to comment on parenting at all.

I will say this: commercials didn't rot my mind. OK, I still collect Transformers, but that's rather harmless, isn't it?

I think I should chime in here for a moment and say this. Did you know the ONLY reason why the RX-78-02 from Mobile Suit Gundam is painted in red, white, yellow, and blue instead of the much more militaristic matte greys Tomino wanted was because Bandai wanted a color scheme that would sell toys?

Having said that, this is how Webkinz works. You buy the primary machine and you access a small amount of content. Buy more characters, get more content. The game constantly reminds you of this. So essentially you have a website based upon a toy that constantly advertises itself. And suddenly I'm supposed to be offended because the latest Seinfeld travesty is toted about? To me, this seems more of a case of "Hey! Get your commercials out of your commercials!"

I think I see a bias here, because we're talking about parents and their kids, and generally when parents leap in to protect their kids from something, we're very cynical about it around here. I know this sounds a lot like the antics of Jack Thompson and company, but we seem to be forgetting two things here:

1) This isn't about ads on a free medium like television, or a free site like Neopets (which Webkinz cribs from heavily). It's about using a pay-to-play game as an ad portal. So whatever your opinion is on seeing ads in Halo, you should have the same attitude here; they're the same situation.

2) Unlike a majority of the stuff GP covers, this is NOT a story about people lobbying for government or regulatory control on games. All they're doing is writing letters to the company asking them to stop. That isn't censorship; nobody's going to force Webkinz to dissolve if they decide to ignore these guys.

Personally, if I were a parent, I'd be pissed if I paid someone to advertise to my kids; it's a huge violation of consumer trust. But if I were the CCFC, I would play dirtier: start a campaign to get Webkinz parents to install Firefox with AdBlock, so they can still use the service while denying the company its ad impressions. :)