Discussion #2 Regulating Food Advertising to Children

When evaluating both arguments of Wootan and Liodice I can only say that both standpoints make great arguments. Wootan's argument is about why the CSPI supports the legislation to regulate  food advertising to children. Even though his intentions mean well because essentially all their trying to do is protect our countries children and keep them healthy, i just felt that it was being very restrivtive and was taking it way too far. In my opinion i really think its the parents responsibility of what their children are consuming. Also if child obesity is such a problem i think we should be installing more excercise and get fit program for kids instead of telling them what is "good food" or "bad foods." His argument only brought about what the adveritsing agencies need to fix or do not really providing facts except about talking how child obesity exists. Now Liodice on the other hand takes the opposite stance of the situation. His argument provides a lot of opinons a responses to Wootans article, he talks about preserving the first amendment and how ridiculous he feels that the guidlines are restricting. When evalutating i would most likey lean toward Liodice position, its more effective and valid to me than Wootan.