Parents worry about the content of the television shows their children watch, but a new University study has concluded that parents also should consider what children are watching between shows.

Kristen Harrison, University professor of speech communications, and Amy L. Marske, a University alumna, found that junk foods high in sugar, fat and sodium dominate food advertisements aired during popular children’s programming. Food advertisements account for nearly a third of all television advertisements, and 43.8 percent of those ads push candy, sweets and soft drinks.

Harrison and Marske also found that junk food advertised during general audience programming was high in saturated fat and sodium, while junk food advertised during youth programming was high in sugar. Food ads also showcased snacking much more frequently than eating meals.

Harrison said that she was compelled to research food advertisements geared toward youth because no study had used nutrition fact labels, mandatory on food products since 1994, to analyze food advertised.

“Consumers really do use these labels, so there is no longer a need to dumb down studies with generalizations like high fat and low fat,” Harrison said. “People can use details like the specific amount of saturated fat and salt in their food.”

Harrison said so-called junk foods could be all right if eaten in moderation, however, moderation is a distant thought for children who watch television and have sugary products dangled in front of their noses so frequently, Harrison said.

“The advertisement landscape is not one of moderation,” Harrison said. “Kids are being bludgeoned over the head with ads of stuff you’re only supposed to have some of.”

When one in seven white children, and one in four black and Hispanic children in the United States are overweight or obese, Harrison insists that advertisers are selling a problem.

“There is something inherently exploitive about airing food ads aimed at children under eight,” Harrison said, explaining that young children do not comprehend the persuasive purpose of ads.

Harrison said children do not realize they are being sold something with a moneymaking agenda; they just see ads as fun information.

Todd Weinstein, junior in Business, debated this aspect of the controversy.

“If parents are there to supervise their children, then food ads are fine,” Weinstein said. “Once a company tricks children into buying an excessive amount of their product, it becomes unethical.”

Harrison and Marske also found that more than 80 percent of the characters and actors featured were a normal weight, regardless of the high-sugar goodies they glorified.

Harrison said parents have a more direct influence on what children eat than advertisements. It is important for parents to be selective when they fill the grocery cart and stress nutrition and healthy dieting to their children, she said.

Emily McKee, senior in Engineering, said she thinks most responsibility should be placed on the parents.

“Advertisers need to be aware of the effects of their ads, especially on kids,” McKee said. “Ultimately, it is not their responsibility, but the responsibility of the parents to decide whether to let their children buy and eat the junk food.”

Still, children possess some power reguarding the choice of their snacks, especially at places with vending machines, like schools.

There is also something called the “Nag Factor,” Harrison said.

“Kids are willing to nag up to 50 times for something, even with the parents saying no every time,” Harrison said. “Sometimes it’s just easier for parents to give in. Advertisers know this.”

Some countries that have restrictions on advertisements to children, including the length and when in the show they are run, Harrison said. But, she added that in the United States, children advertisement restrictions are an unlikely remedy. The government has little control over the media because everything is so corporation-driven, Harrison said.