SUBJECT:
ADVERTISING TO CHILDREN
PURPOSE:
This briefing note is a recommendation for changes in policy pertaining
to advertising to children.
ISSUE:
There is not enough restriction in advertising to children.
Background:
Children’s brains are highly impressionable. There are various products that advertise to
children. Specifically toys and or foods. Through these advertisements children have a
feeling of needing to have the next great toy.
This causes massive hysteria especially during the Christmas
holidays. People want to gift their kids
with the latest gadgets and toys.
Targetting children through these advertisements causes children to have
bad habits in which they feel that they are entitled to what is being
advertised. As stated earlier, children’s
minds are highly impressionable. A
report from Yale University specifies that children, since their brains are not
as developed as adults, cannot tell the difference between television
programming and or commercials. This same
study found that these children were also more likely to eat sugary snacks
during the same commercials that aired.
This causes massive problems for childhood obesity and behavioral issues. The impact of this all boils down to the
health care system. If we persist in
advertising to children, we can expect a less healthy population and more usage
of medical resources for these children that have become adults.
The availability of satellite and the
internet have impacted the effectiveness of the banning of advertising to
children in Sweden. It is because places
like the UK do not have the same policy implemented. Through this, people are able to watch their
programming with no regulation whatsoever on advertisements. It is important that collective action be
taken to promote the wellbeing of our future generation. We all should work together to limit advertising
to children for if we don’t, there could be grave repercussions to our health
care system.
Unhealthy foods advertised to children
cause them to be more likely to be obese when they grow up. There have also been reports of an increase
in child parent conflicts. These
conflicts consist of the child’s desire to have the latest toys or the yummiest
foods. As specified, there is a link
between advertisements, obesity and behavioral issues.
Considerations:
Advertising expenditures generated an
estimated $9.14 billion in 2016. Canada
is ranked the tenth highest in the world when it relates to marketing and
advertising. Therefore, it is important
that the industry continues to generate revenue as it is a major source of
income for many people that work within it.
When compared to the USA, advertising spending for the same period is
believed to be $190.84 billion. This
industry is very large and a lot of people have a stake in it. Through advertising, many job holders are
dependent. The main stake holders here
are the individual families with children, the networks or publications, and
the business such as toy companies and or food companies that advertise to
children. The networks and publications
stand to loose a considerable amount of money from these businesses if advertisement
is more regulated when in consideration of children. However, the benefit will be seen in the
health care industry. The medical
industry statistics reveal that obeisity costs the USA $147 billion in
2008. Obesity can result in health
problems and things such as absenteeism from work. It is important to factor in these statistics
when deliberating about whether or not to advertise to children.
Options:
Option 1:
Full ban on advertisement to children.
This option is not as feasible as it
seems. There are numerous jobs dependent
on advertisement. There is also the fact
of a lack of collective action. Through this
lack, people would gain access through satellite television or through the internet. Advertisement accounts for a substantial
amount of revenue for networks and or publication. It is a guarantee that those companies would
not take kindly to such policy and they possibly would cause massive push back
against this policy. The benefit of less
advertisement to children would be that products would become cheaper as
budgets for the development of products would no longer need to factor in the advertisement. Accessibility would be hampered because if
this policy gets implemented advertisements would no longer be able to target
children thus impacting their knowledge of such product. On the matter of public acceptability, it
remains uncertain as to how the public would like such policy to be implemented
however, judging from the fact that there is a lack of collective action in
this matter, it becomes clear that such policy is unpopular.
Option 2:
Partial ban of advertising to children.
This option is moderately feasible as
networks and publications can negotiate on a compromise. Perhaps limiting advertisement of unhealthy
foods to children would be likely as the implications to the health care system
is tremendous. Partially banning this
sort of advertisement can relieve the bloated medical system of unnecessary visits
to the doctor. People would be less
likely to consume these unhealthy foods and would thus lead healthier
lives. From an accessibility standpoint,
it becomes evident that less healthy foods would become more difficult to be
aware of. Perhaps taxing these unhealthy
foods can benefit the cause to support healthier lives. Public acceptability of such tax is very
low. People are always upset even
angered when a new tax is implemented and that would be difficult to implement
because of this public backlash.
Option 3:
Education.
This option is very feasible. This education would evidently give the
autonomy to the people. Through this,
they would be able to make informed choices on which advertisements appeal to
them. Networks and publications can
perhaps include statements or disclaimers on each advertisement they air or
publicize so that people can be more informed.
The issue here is that children are still unable to determine what is
programming and what are commercials or advertisement. Networks and publications must work on a
system in which they can address this concern.
Perhaps taking the approach of the cigarette industry is an option
wherein tobacco products have large disclaimers on items.
Option 4:
Status quo
Maintaining the current policy would only
result in increased strain to our medical system. This option is the easy way however, its
negatives are far and wide. Specifically
obesity would increase and this can further implicate our medical system. Obesity already costs billions of dollars, if
we maintain the status quo, it could cost more when e factor in an increase in
population. Accessibility, on the other
hand would remain unchanged. Businesses
that advertise to children namely toys and unhealthy foods would prefer the
status quo as no change would occur which would effectively allow them to
continue. However, it is possible that
these businesses could become more efficient, which would then not be gold for
jobs. Through an increased in efficiency,
we could see some people loosing their jobs as tasks become consolidated in
this multitasking world. Public acceptance
or support would remain unchanged.
Recommendation:
Option two is recommended.
No comments:
Post a Comment