Advertisements Exploiting Children

Are current practises of advertisement to churlren exploitative? What restrictions should be placed on advertise to children? Up until recently, pargonnts had been the intended target audience for advertising efforts aimed for children of two-year-old age groups. However it is instanter the children who accept become the main focus.The growth in advertising conduct r to each oneing children and the privatisation of childrens media use have resulted in a dramatic increase in advertising directly intended for the eyes and ears of children (Wilcox et al. 2004). It is estimated that advertisers spend more than $12 billion a year on the youth market with more than 40,000 commercials each year. The current practises of advertising to preadolescent children definitely exploit their neglect of empathiseing and comprehension of the aim of advertising and promotion of products.In the early 1970s, The Federal Communications Commission primitively set out to ban all advertising that was aimed at young children, however ended up settling for a more lenient proposal of limiting the amount of time advertisements were aired inside childrens programs and put in place certain restrictions to do with advertising practises (Wilcox et al. 2004). Studies have shown that the age place of 8-12 year olds spend $30 billion directly and influence $700 billion on family spending each year.This can be attributed to a relatively mellow extent to the fact that 46% of 5-14 year olds keep up more than 20 hours of television 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 oer a 6 week holiday period would have considered a constitutional of 649 junk victuals ads including 404 advertisements for fast foods 135 advertisements for soft drinks and 44 for ice cream products. Until quite recently, advertisers viewed children well-nigh and under the age group of 8 as off limits when it came to ad vertising targets.However, industry practises have now developed and make for greater degrees of age niche advertising (Wilcox et al. 2004). Along with this growth in marketing efforts, at that place has become a rapid increase in the use psychological knowledge and search to strongly market products to young children. An example of this includes a study that was specifically designed to determine which scheme best induced children to nag their p bents to buy the advertised product (Wilcox et al. 004). Exploitation refers to the idea of taking value of something you shouldnt take advantage of. In relation to ads, advertisers atomic number 18 taking advantage of childrens need of understanding, their innocence and their vulnerability to persuasion (Neil 2012). Young children tend to be particularly vulner able-bodied to advertising as they do not fully understand the heart of advertisers and the process of creating an ad (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005).Children are not born( p) with any knowledge of economic systems with their awareness of advertising and marketing developing only gradually subsequent in life. Adults too can be influenced by an ad, which is the reason for ads in general, but they are able to interpret the messages in the context of the advertisers intentions to prevent them from being exploited, unlike children (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005). Neil (2012) states that children up to the age of 4 visit ads merely as entertainment, progressing to believe advertisements provide schooling at ages 6-7.At ages 7-8 they still cannot distinguish between learning 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 explain sales techniques. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (2007) explain that advertisers may shape advertisements that appeal to a childs cognitive abilities. Research was conducted that indicates different age groups respond differ ently to formal stimuli in commercial, for example colours attract younger children while message text attracts elder children.This uses leverage of childrens cognitive development to entice the purchase of the product. Furthermore research on the phrase of advertisements, while used to promote products, may be purposefully constructed to confuse younger children at freeze off levels of cognitive development. Simple correlation research in the US indicates that children typically aged 2-6 years who view more television advertising request 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 cleverness to contextualise and act critically on the observations do, 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 victimization on the arents behalf as it a great deal 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 commercial enterprise food. There are little ads emphasising healthy eating and since the start of television advertising, the largest proportion of ads aimed at children has perpetually been unhealthy food products (Gunter, Oates & Blades 2005).The Australian Communications and Media Authority (2007) detailed the New South Wales Department of wellness content analysis which found that 43% of all food advertising was for lofty fat/ high sugar foods and 36% was for core foods (such as b makes, pasta). Additionally, approximately 48% of food advertising in time defined by the study as childrens viewing times was for high fat/ high sugar foods. Consequently, children become confused and consider unhealthy foods to actually be healthy. Toys arent as arguable 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 very unethical as children cannot enshroud some messages. The writing on the screen 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 spirit 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 positive attitudes toward consumption of such products.The studies conclude that advertising of tobacco and alcohol contributes to youth take in and drinking. Characters from movies and television programmes often attract chil drens attention with research indicating that the use of real life or animated characters is positively associated with memory 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 harder for children to recognise when they are being targeted by marketers. This shows a negative change in childrens advertising. Body 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 reinforce the pressures on young people to conform to the ideals of beauty that are hard or near impossible to achieve.Marketing o f fast 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, enforce by the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal. These include placing limitations on the broadcast of advertisements during Children School Age programs (no ad more than twice in 30 minutes) and Preschool Age programs (no ads at all).Also, no misleading or deceiving ads, no excessive pressure on children to ask their parents to buy something or any unsuitable material including alcohol and cigarette ads, or demeaning/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 essential to restrict efforts made by advertisers to focus primarily, if not exclusivel y, 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, consultation and comprehending. For example, stating You have to put it together instead of Partial assembly required in toy ads. Gunter, Oates and Blades (2005) nous out that advertisers usually argue against any extension 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 persuasive intent. Some argue that rather than extending regulations, the most effective way to help children understand advertising is through their parents by informing kids of the nature 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 discuss 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, accepting most of the claims and appeals put forward as truthful, accurate and unbiased. Reference Australian Communications and Media Authority 2007, Television Advertising to Children, accessed 6/9/2012, http//www. acma. gov. a u/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, crucify 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