PEDIATRICS Vol. 62 No. 3 September 1978, pp. 428-431
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feinbloom, R. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feinbloom, R. I.

TV update

Richard I. Feinbloom M.D.1

1 Family Practice Group and the family Health Care Program, Harvard Medical School 2464 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 0214

The public debate over television and its impact on children is heating up. Two highly visible skirmishes of 1978 are the investigation into television advertising to children by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the trial in California of a bizarre rape claimed to have been perpetrated in imitation of a crime which appeared on a television drama.

The FTC has scheduled nile-making hearings in the fall of 1978 to consider whether television advertising to young children is inherently "unfair and deceptive" and whether restrictions should be placed specifically on the advertising to children of sugared products. Entering into these deliberations will be research and anecdotal evidence and authoritative opinions about the developmental capacity of children to make discerning judgments regarding advertising; the relation between sugar intake and dental caries and obesity; and the potentially disruptive effects of TV commercials on family life.