Section of Draft for Review

[blueriver005]

For the following passage, I had questions about its relevance to my paper. I am attempting to show how the cereal box continues to engage the reader post-purchase through the use of gimmicks like sweepstakes. Though I don't go into this closely, I thought that there were some interesting parts that needed inspection. What kind of prizes are

Comments

[andrewlo]

this analysis of how the package continues to engage the consumer is definitely important. remember, discourse shapes FUTURE discourse as well and i believe that's what's going on here; the message received here will shape the consumer's construct of the caribbean, the cartoon, and video games (not to mention cereal, and what the cereal experience includes). as this is only a selection, i don't know if you're using this to illustrate a given theory or putting it out on its own, but i think that if you pair this bit of analysis (perhaps flesh out and deepen your analysis too) with some theory, it would be a great asset to your paper.

best of luck!

andrew

[conus322]

I think your analysis is great and if I remember correctly it adds to your claim because it is another way that the cereal companies get the kids to want this kind of cereal. I think the that the sweepstakes rule that the parent has to be active in the submitting an entry is REALLY interesting. Just as the child needs permission from their parents to buy the cereal, they need approval from them to enter the sweepstakes. Plus the cereal company is using Kim Possible again in the sweepstakes part and the cartoon is the main reason the kids want the cerealy in the first place. It's all about adventure. Kim Possible is going on an "adventure" in the cereal box. So maybe the kids what to go on an adventure like Kim too?? The family of four is interesting too. Why is it of four? not 3? (this probably isn't too important, but maybe something to think about??)

[andrewlo]

i need comments. thanks

[jonesk2]

I don't know that the inclusion of the parents should be looked at as anything more than a legal requirement. If anything, including parents in this type of run around will only lead to disappointment in the child. The goal is to keep the child as interested in the cereal for as long as possible, so when it comes time to buy cereal again, the child will remember the amazing time they had with good ol' cap'n crunch and Kim Possible and want to buy the same stuff. I didn't really see any language too complex for kids, cap'n crunch said "see the side of the box," so they'll listen to their ol' buddy and then the remainder constitutes legal mumbo jumbo required to advertise in this way. The games, the prizes, the giveaways are all just attempts to engage the children to work toward repeat business, even if their cereal downright sucks. But of course, this is only my opinion.

[brooke83]

Although it seems odd that a children's cereal box would engage parents in a sweepstakes geared towards kids, I agree with Kyle that this is a legal requirement that stems from the fact that a child can't usually take a 7 day trip to the Caribbean without his or her parents. Only children are able to enter because it is a kids cereal. Cap'n Crunch wants kids to be on the vacation they are giving away so that they can promote the winner through their product. Something interesting to consider is what the vacation offer does to motivate a parent to let their kids eat Cap'n Crunch. Since it is a relatively unhealthy cereal, perhaps the vacation is offered so that the cereal will become more appealing to adults.