Advertisements Exploiting Children

Are trustworthy practises of publicize to children exploitative? What restrictions should be placed on advertise to children? Up until recently, p arnts had been the intended target audience for ad efforts aimed for children of juvenility jump on groups. each(prenominal) the alike(p) it is now the children who build become the main focus.The growth in advertising channels pass arounding children and the privatisation of childrens media character scram resulted in a dramatic increase in advertising directly intended for the eyeball and ears of children (Wilcox et al. 2004). It is estimated that advertisers spend more(prenominal) than $12 billion a year on the youth market with more than 40,000 commercials each year. The current practises of advertising to unfledged children definitely exploit their want of collar and comprehension of the aim of advertising and promotion of produces.In the early 1970s, The Federal communication theory Commission originally range o ut to ban all advertising that was aimed at unexampled children, so far ended up settling for a more lenient suggestion of limiting the make out of time advertisements were aired within childrens programs and depute in place certain restrictions to do with advertising practises (Wilcox et al. 2004). Studies defend shown that the age range of 8-12 year olds spend $30 billion directly and crook $700 billion on family spending each year.This can be attributed to a relatively elevated extent to the fact that 46% of 5-14 year olds enamour more than 20 hours of television system per week with tens of thousands of TV ads shown per year (Neil 2012). Neil (2012) quotes that a child who watches 4 hours of TV per day over a 6 week holiday period would have viewed a total of 649 altercate nutrition ads including 404 advertisements for fast foods 135 advertisements for soft drinks and 44 for ice cream off products. Until quite recently, advertisers viewed children around and under the age group of 8 as off limits when it came to advertising targets.However, industry practises have now go againsted and draw and quarter for greater degrees of age niche advertising (Wilcox et al. 2004). Along with this growth in marketing efforts, on that point has become a rapid increase in the use psychological friendship and look to effectively market products to younker children. An example of this embroils a study that was specifically designed to determine which dodging best induced children to nag their parents to debase the advertised product (Wilcox et al. 004). obtainment refers to the idea of taking advantage of something you shouldnt take advantage of. In relation to ads, advertisers are taking advantage of childrens lack of discovering, their artlessness and their vulnerability to persuasion (Neil 2012). Young children tend to be particularly vulnerable to advertising as they do non fully understand the figure of advertisers and the process of creatin g an ad (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005).Children are non born with any lastledge of economic systems with their awareness of advertising and marketing developing only step by step later in life. Adults too can be influenced by an ad, which is the curtilage for ads in general, but they are able to interpret the messages in the consideration of the advertisers intentions to prevent them from beingness work, unlike children (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005). Neil (2012) states that children up to the age of 4 opticalise ads merely as entertainment, progressing to believe advertisements provide information at ages 6-7.At ages 7-8 they mumness cannot distinguish between information and intent to persuade and once they reach 10-12 years they can understand the motives and aims of advertising but are still unable to justify sales techniques. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (2007) explain that advertisers may create advertisements that appeal to a childs cognitive abili ties. Research was conducted that indicates different age groups respond differently to formal stimuli in commercial, for example colours attract younger children while message schoolbook attracts older children.This uses leverage of childrens cognitive development to entice the obtain of the product. Furthermore research on the verbiage of advertisements, while used to sanction products, may be purposefully constructed to confuse younger children at bring low levels of cognitive development. Simple correlation research in the US indicates that children typically aged 2-6 years who view more television advertising invite more products from their parents. This is known as pester power.It has been found that parents are more likely to buy products when kids ask for them in the shop (nag factor). As children age, they develop the cognitive capacity to contextualise and act critically on the observations made, reducing the amount of requests for products (Australian Communications and Media Authority, 2007). Children who are exposed to TV commercials for toys not only develop the initial idea for the toy but repeatedly pester their parents to buy it. This is exploitation on the arents behalf as it often causes parent-child conflict when the parents deny their children the product (Wilcox et al. 2004). Another troubling issue relating to child advertising exploitation is in reference to food ads. Half of the advertisements in the UK directed at children extend to food. There are little ads emphasising healthy eating and since the start of television advertising, the largest proportion of ads aimed at children has always been unhealthy food products (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005).The Australian Communications and Media Authority (2007) detailed the New South Wales Department of Health sate analysis which found that 43% of all food advertising was for high generative/ high sugar foods and 36% was for core foods (such as breads, pasta). Additionally, almost 4 8% of food advertising in times defined by the study as childrens viewing times was for high fat/ high sugar foods. Consequently, children become confused and consider unhealthy foods to really be healthy. Toys arent as controversial as they dont exhibit the same health implications as do fast food ads.However, over-playing how good a toy is, or presenting misleading information is rattling unethical as children cannot comprehend some messages. The writing on the check about disclosures are usually too quick to read or even understand as an adult, let alone a young child (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005). Wilcox et al. (2004) demonstrates the exploiting nature of advertisers when it comes to tobacco and alcohol. A variety of studies show a substantial relationship between childrens viewing of these products in ads and confirmatory attitudes toward consumption of such products.The studies conclude that advertising of tobacco and alcohol contributes to youth smoking and drinking. Char acters from movies and television programmes often attract childrens attention with research indicating that the use of real life or animated characters is positively associated with memory board and attitudes toward products and has the potential to confuse children as they do not realise they are getting paid for the advertisement so it is likely its not genuine promotion of a product (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005). Another trick that advertisers use is on the BBC.BBC programs are non-commercial but some of the programs have been specifically designed to include products directed at children to make it voicelesser for children to recognise when they are being targeted by marketers. This shows a negative change in childrens advertising. tree trunk image is another major aspect of young childrens lives as they are vulnerable to their self-image (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005). Advertisements use attractive people to sell products which honour the pressures on young people to confor m to the ideals of beauty that are hard or near impossible to achieve.Marketing of dieting products therefore appeal to young children in recent times including primary school children. Currently there are regulations in place that have been implemented under the Childrens Television Standards in 1990, enforced by the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal. These include placing limitations on the broadcast of advertisements during Children School Age programs (no ad more than doubly in 30 minutes) and Preschool Age programs (no ads at all).Also, no misleading or deceiving ads, no undue pressure on children to ask their parents to buy something or any unsuitable material including alcohol and cigarette ads, or put down/racists/sexist etc. ads(Australian Communications and Media Authority 2007). To further these regulations, many recommendations have been made. Wilcox et al (2004) suggested that while it is impossible to protect this age group from all commercial exposure, it is essentia l to restrict efforts made by advertisers to focus primarily, if not exclusively, on this uniquely vulnerable portion of society.They also state that advertising disclaimers used in ads be stated in a language that children can read and understand and be shown in both visual and audial contexts in a time length that is conducive to reading, hearing and comprehending. For example, stating You have to put it together instead of Partial assembly required in toy ads. Gunter, Oates and Blades (2005) point out that advertisers usually argue against any supplement of regulations, claiming that very young children, even from the age of 3, have some understanding of advertising.If this is so, it is not enough. A childs recognition of advertisements is not the same as a childs understanding of their telling intent. both(prenominal) argue that rather than extending regulations, the most effective way to help children understand advertising is through their parents by informing kids of the n ature of ads. However as children become more independent with access to their own TVs, parents increasingly have less control over what children watch and less opportunity to treat advertisements that might have been seen during family viewing.As well as the fact that parents often lack sufficient knowledge of regulators and their regulatory responsibilities. These excuses made by advertisers just show how ignorant they are in the potential harming of young children. In conclusion, advertisers know that their efforts greatly influence child audiences. Targeting children below the ages of 8 years is inherently unfair because it capitalises on younger childrens inability to sense persuasive intent in an advertisement.Due to this, children around and below this age are exploited as they take in information placed in commercials uncritically, accept most of the claims and appeals put forward as truthful, accurate and unbiased. Reference Australian Communications and Media Authority 20 07, Television Advertising to Children, accessed 6/9/2012, http//www. acma. gov. au/webwr/_assets/main/lib310132/television_advertising_to_children. pdf Gunter, B, Oates, C & Blades, M 2005, The Issues About Television Advertising To Children, in Advertising To Children On TV Content, Impact, Regulation, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp1-13.Neil, D 2012, PHIL106 Advertising to Children, lecture notes, accessed 1/9/2012, emailprotected Wilcox, B, Kunkel, D, Cantor, J, Dowrick, P, Linn, S & Palmer, E 2004, Report of the APA Task Force on Advertising and Children, American Psychological Association Australian Association of national Advertisers, AANA Code for Advertising & Marketing Communications to Children, accessed 9/9/2012, http//www. aana. com. au/pages/aana-code-for-advertising-marketing-communications-to-children. html