"Apparently Shape-Ups not only firm your butt, they give you the ability to reject food as well."

I see it more as her rejecting fat dudes.

"[A]t least two independent studies found that these types of shoes have no benefit in terms of fitness" is not the same as "Both studies found that there was no significant difference between any of the toning shoes and the standard running shoe" (quote from the linked article).
It is hard to find a significant difference if you test on just 12 subjects.

I signed the petition to have these removed from stores, and seeing a professional analyze message I don't regret it. Also they're NOT available for boys, how interesting.

Also, if they were truly targetting childhood obesity, why are these for girls only?

My tween says that the news anchor intro and the parts with the food are not in the commercial as seen on tv - just the concert parts. She reports having seen the concert-only version of the commercial on Nick and Cartoon Network (and it must have been awhile ago since we've canceled our cable). She also wants me to add that she thinks the commercial is dumb. "What does pouting walking food have to do with anything?" she asks.

Some of the versions of this shoe are geared at girls much younger than tween. My tween wouldn't be caught dead wearing white and pink sparkly Mary Janes. The only ones my daughter likes are shown at 11 seconds - the dark gray and dark pink. Otherwise they look like they are for "little kids" she says. Seems like a bit of a marketing disconnect - the ad is for tweens but the shoes aren't.

Are they specifically supposed to tone your "butt" thought? I thought it was just a vague claim that it would make you more "in shape." I suppose it's not that huge of a difference, but I saw the "<3 your butt" commercials as more of a "lol women only want to get in shape so their butts look nice for menzes" than "this product is for your butt." Maybe I'm wrong, but that would remove one minor gripe with the fact that these are aimed at young girls.

Regardless, I have to agree with everyone else here. Girls that you shouldn't really be worried about how fat a cupcake is going to make their legs. And, what shorelines and crazy otaku kid said.....it's just something that annoys me, but if this product is obviously for girls BELOW tween age (wouldn't a good chunk of tweens be wearing adult sized shoes anyway?), but the cartoons hawking them appear to be young teens.

UNNECESSARY! for that target market.

This 52 year old fart has a pair though and I think they work(?) Very hard to walk on at first...you feel as if on a balance beam, or really drunk.

Aloha.

Shoreline's tween has the right idea - what does walking food have to do with anything? Maybe they are trying to send some kind of message, which could be, "avoid junk food, 7-year-olds, because you're never too young for an eating disor... I mean, to HAVE FUN! Because nothing's more fun than starving yourself and wearing dorky shoes. Except maybe playing an actual sport in shoes designed to prevent injury and cushion your growing legs instead of making you feel drunk, not to mention eating when you're hungry. But look! The shoes are pink! DON'T THINK. JUST BUY THEM!"

But if that's the message, the commercial doesn't convey it very well at all. It's just confusing and weird, even to an adult. So it fails on all levels.

Also! I wonder if the food trailing behind her is supposed to have a double meaning - not only is she saying no to food, but she's also now desirable to boys, who are getting exhausted chasing her around (in their weird food costumes). Because that's another thing 7-year-olds should worry about - being desired by boys (in food costumes).

With the flack that the company is getting from the injuries people (adults) are sustaining from their product already, I'm actually surprised they've introduced a new line aimed at a younger crowd. Seems like a recipe for disaster, not to mention a class action law suit to me.

I think SHORELINES and Otaku are on to something. I'm going to do a little experiment... I have a 6 yr old girl. I'm going to get her to watch this full length commercial, and see what she thinks about it...

(after watching it...)
Me: So, what did you think about the commercial?
Her: Cool.
Me: Oh, okay. So do you know what they were selling?
Her: Shoes(?)
Me: Okay. So are you interested in wearing those shoes?
Her: Yeah.
Me: Alright, so if you had those shoes, what would happen to you? Er, how would they improve your life?
Her: I would run faster(?)
Me: What makes you think that?
Her: The lady was running away from the fatty foods.
Me: Oh. So, what did you like best about the commercial?
Her: The song.
Me: Oh really? Would you like the song as much if a boy were singing it?
Her: No way. Boys are dumb...
Me: Okay, thank you. Run along and play now...

So, in our conversation, I noticed a few things.
~Evidently, the sensory mechanisms they used worked, because she thought it was "cool", despite not being completely sure what product they were selling, or what benefit she would gain from the product.
~Another thing that struck me was that she referenced the main character in the commercial as "the lady". So, unlike other commercials that market to kids, using images of other children (peers) having fun, or otherwise benefiting from the product, their using a more mature model. This says to me that they're also selling a sense of maturity and being more "grown-up".
~It's no surprise that this commercial wouldn't have had anywhere near the same effect on my daughter if it had been a male lead character. People tend to identify more with their own gender more often than not.
~With the recent health craze as of late, my little one already knows that ice cream, cupcakes, and hot dogs are not very good things to consume regularly. So, to combine her dislike of boys, her programing of thinking the foods portrayed are "fatty" and undesirable, and the fact that the costumed boys are out of breath, sweating, and lagging behind the mature, fit, lead character is actually a pretty smart move on their part.
~Additionally, I'm speculating that the target audience may not singularly be little girls. Perhaps one of the marketing angles may be to the parents (mothers in particular) that already use the adult version of these shoes, or may just be interested in trying to improve their child's health. I have seen quite often instances where parents are consumed with the idea of creating "mini-me"s. Or, conversely, the child of a parent who uses a product will naturally want to emulate what they see their parents doing (or the products their using), adding to their desire.
~What I'm not so sure that I agree with is the angle for shaping ones rear and legs aimed at children. The commercial never mentioned anything about muscle tone, definition, or shaping the lower body. Of course we've seen the adult version hawked as shaping, firming, and toning, blah, blah, blah. But, as with most adult commercials, the kids don't really pay much attention, so the sales pitch doesn't stick. Now, what I will agree with is that when girls hit that tween-ager point, where they get their first twinges of hormones, maturity starts becoming a big issue, and boys aren't quite as gross as they used to be, the shape of ones body becomes more important. Yes, some of this is due to social impressions, media influence, parental role models, and other environmental factors. However, (I know I'm going to get flamed for this...) there's a natural internal desire to attract a mate that begins around this age. The more adult hormones begin increase, and the closer one gets to puberty the more often these subconscious urges to attract a mate increase along with it. Sadly, the manner in which most young girls learn to attract is through the media, and from their peers. And even more unfortunate than that is the fact that sex is sold so widely and publicly, that it easily becomes the focal point for young women. Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but it seems to me that tween and teen girls are influenced more to concentrate on the more physical aspects of attraction, rather than the mental or emotional...

Whoops... Sorry, I started rambling again.

Yeah, I know I'm probably reading far too deep into a simple commercial, but I just figured I'd add my humble point of view into the mix.

Just for the record, the "evidence" against includes an experiment by the American Council of Exercise that I've read that tested (gasp) all of TWELVE people! I haven't read any of the positive reports that Sketcher's put out, and honestly I can't say if they do any good or not, but any study that involves 12 people is clinically worthless.

Nine Deuce did this already but better.

This commercial is extremely disturbing to me - and the most disturbing part by far is the image of the girl walking away from exhausted boys dressed as food items. The image juxtaposes junk food (sinful!) with sexual attention (sinful!), and shows our protagonist happily walking away from both. Because of her shoes, of course.

It sends such a literal message conflating food and sex, and reminding the viewer to abstain from both. We see variations of this all the time in advertisements aimed at adult women, of course, but I absolutely hate seeing it aimed at such young girls.

There's the image of the girl being chased by boys who are interested in her. They're following her because of how attractive she is. Of course the subtext of Shape Ups is that they will make you more attractive (though in the adult ads, the marketing is very blatant).

As much as we may hate to admit it, even 10-year-olds are sexual - not in the same way adults are, to be sure, but that doesn't mean that these kinds of messages don't resonate with them in an important way ("If I wear those shoes, I'll 'shape up' and boys will like me so much they'll chase me.")

Even regardless of how the kids interpret it, the parents are the ones with the spending power - so I think it's important to remember that the ad has to resonate with parents as powerfully - if not, more so - than it does with the kids. And if parents see these shoes as somehow empowering their daughters to resist the temptations of food and boys, then that's a very compelling (however dubious) message.

The commercial seems to indicate that colorful shoes with padded soles might encourage physical activity instead of sitting around gorging on junk food. So it's fine with me.

I'm a 54-year-old male and have a pair of (dignified, black) Sketcher Shape-Ups. After keeping track on my calendar with different shoes, I can confirm that they're easier on my knees, no question, than my New Balance walking shoes. The round sole encourages a shorter stride and more upright posture. As to firming my butt, I have no idea. If anyone is scoping out my butt they aren't telling me about it (thank goodness).

I remember seeing this as a child, around 10 or 11 and thinking how it was kind of messed up that they were depicting boys as fast food, putting a negative correlation there. Also, I did not remember the ad being that cringey. I see that it is making some sort of connotation between boys and an unhealthy lifestyle and how girls are supposed to stay fit and have fun. Very strange, and mildly sexist if not harmful. I was very weight conscious as a kid and still am.