Marketing Communications

568 CHAPTER 16 ETHICAL ISSUES IN MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS

Some say that advertising to children is inherently unfair and deceptive because children

lack the cognitive skills and life experiences needed to resist persuasive claims and because

marketers take advantage of a child’s inability to weigh evidence and make an informed

decision. A counter-argument is that ads can help parents and children to make informed

choices. In any case, children have a number of unique vulnerabilities. It is only by the age of

fi ve that they are able to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial content. By

approximately eight years they are able to recognise the persuasive intent of advertising and

to use this knowledge to interpret selling messages. It is only when children are aged 10–12

that they acknowledge that advertising does not always tell the truth and that they become

sceptical about advertising; in other words, they actively use their defence mechanism. A

new challenge is the blurring of advertising and entertainment. TV commercials focus on

entertainment and image creation and are oft en linked to exciting website games (adver-

games) and brand characters. Brands targeted at children are placed in movies. Commercially

sponsored websites contain games and promotions designed for children. Research indicates

that more than two-thirds of websites designed for children rely on advertising as their pri-

mary source of income. Research also reveals that primarily older children (11–12) are more

likely to shape their product usage as a result of this banded entertainment or ‘advertainment’.

Many countries have strict rules and legislation about advertising to children.^56 The negative social consequences

of advertising to children underpin the rationale for advertising restrictions, and the debate has mainly focused on

food products.^57 Notwithstanding this extensive regulation, there is no strong consensus that advertising directed

at children should be banned.^58 In the context of the obesity debate, Berman^59 states that there is no reason to

believe that a complete ban on advertising would have any impact on childhood obesity rates, and Eagle et al. 60

also conclude that there is a growing body of evidence that banning food ads targeted at children would be both

inequitable and ineffective. Nevertheless, many parents seem to be in favour of stricter legislation on and control

of (food) advertising directed at children. Burr and Burr,^61 in their study of 400 US parents, had already noticed a

call for greater federal legislation. And Chan and McNeal^62 also concluded that parents feel strongly that advertising

should be banned on children’s programming. On the other hand, Spungin^63 wonders whether, without food adver-

tising, parents would buy better food. In this study, 40% of parents thought they did not have enough information

about providing their children with a healthy diet, and they did not particularly like advertising bans. In any case,

Nathanson et al. 64 concluded that a high perceived threat and concern about TV content lead to more support for

censorship.

Besides these ‘hard’ regulations, there are also ‘soft’ measures. The most widely known are self-regulatory

initiatives by the advertising industry. Gray^65 states that advertising self-regulation is the best way to control

advertising, and refers to the ‘International Code of Advertising Practices’ of the International Chamber of

Commerce (ICC). The CARU (Children’s Advertising Review Unit), a self-regulatory body in the USA, claims to

ensure that advertising directed at children is truthful, accurate and appropriate.^66 However, in the 1970s, it had

already been found that there is a great deal of cynicism about self-regulation and, as long as there are concerned

parents who question the efficacy of industry self-regulation efforts, children’s advertising is likely to remain a

controversial issue.^67 Soft measures refer not only to self-regulation by the industry, but also to initiatives such as

the formation of parent monitor groups, independent organisations or multi-party bodies (consisting of parents,

educators, broadcasters, etc.).^68

As far as the support for hard or soft measures is concerned, Walsh et al. 69 concluded that many options on

regulations and control had been offered, but that mothers were inconsistent in their views and preferences.

RESEARCH INSIGHT

Advertising to children: the call for regulation

M16_PELS3221_05_SE_C16.indd 568M16_PELS3221_05_SE_C16.indd 568 6/6/13 8:59 AM6/6/13 8:59 AM