Children and Advertising

When turning on a children's television program we do not expect that by watching the program, we are a target for advertisers. When we think of children's television we think entertainment and education, not consumerism. But indeed, marketing and advertising towards children exists in a big way; through television as well as many other mediums.

Marketers and advertisers make children connect products with their own lives. "Barbie has a puppy and a new outfit just like me!" or "I have that cereal in my cabinet!" are thoughts that could run through a child's mind as they sit in front of the television. And as they sit there watching cartoons or other programming, they are seeing a lot more than what they realize. Commercials flash in between children's programs so seamlessly that young children hardly know how to separate commercial from program. "Children only gradually come to understand that commercials are trying to sell something" (Grossberg). And this inability to detect the intention of consumerism from commercials by children truly is the key to advertising towards them.

Through many techniques, advertisers move into the world of children at a very young age. "Marketers plant the seeds of brand recognition in very young children, in the hopes that the seeds will grow into lifetime relationships" ("How Marketers"). Brand recognition is a very successful way of advertising to children. When companies push their logo in commercials, on their merchandise and anywhere else, they are making their presence known. "According to the Center for a New American Dream, babies as young as six months of age can form mental images of corporate logos and mascots" ("How Marketers"). This fact is extremely grave. Children across the country know that the "swoosh" stands for the Nike company or that the golden arches belong to McDonald's. This brand recognition is ingenious in the world of advertising. Get a logo and get it stuck in children's minds and you have an almost definite sale.

These techniques are successful for the advertisers, but are they successful in society as a whole? When children are being bombarded with advertising and they don't even know it, it becomes a question of ethics. "Young children have difficulty distinguishing between advertising and reality in ads, and ads can distort their view of the world" a statement from Consumer Reports claims ("Special Issues"). This sort of undetectable tactic is very disturbing. Children are products of consumerism without a choice or a say and this is victimization.

Perhaps one of the most victimizing tactics of advertising towards children is that of "buzz marketing". This method is "a new twist on the tried-and-true 'word of mouth' method. The idea is to find the coolest kids in a community and have them use or wear your product in order to create a buzz around it" ("How Marketers"). This sort of advertising can be seen as one of the shallowest strategy. Not only are advertisers undermining and victimizing children through sneaky tactics, they are enforcing that "distorted view" of the world. By showing kids that the "coolest kids" have the newest and best products, they are enforcing a materialistic value upon our society's children. They are putting out the message that you can define yourself only by the products you own and the status you hold.

With the targeting of children through television and through popularity, advertisers are creating a society of greedy, materialistic children. "Parents should be concerned about the effect excessive materialism can have on the development of their children's self image and values" ("Special Issues"). It would be easy to say that parents can save their children from becoming victims of consumerism, but this raises another issue. Parents themselves fall victim to "pester power" which "refers to children's ability to nag their parents into purchasing items they may not otherwise buy. Marketing to children is all about creating pester power, because advertisers know what a powerful force it can be." This power that children have over parents might seem shameful in other societies. How can a child have such strong control over their parents? To answer this, we must look deeper into American society.

When looking closely at this relationship between children and consumerism, we see the parents playing a large role. After all, the parents are the ones purchasing the products, not the children. The reason for this is part of the ethical construction in the 21^st century in America:

"Parents today are willing to buy more for their kids because trends such as smaller family size, dual incomes and postponing children until later in life mean that families have more disposable income. As well, guilt can play a role in spending decisions as time-stressed parents substitute material goods for time spent with their kids" ("How Marketers").

The guilt that working parents feel is an area that advertisers hone in on. Parents feel that their children are "missing out" and so they will do anything to fill that void. Whether it is buying the trendiest clothes or the latest toy on the market, these parents will undoubtedly buy. Parents feel that the products their children are "pestering" for are important. It is this importance that "appeals to parents' desire to provide the best for their children, and plays on any guilt they may have about not having enough time for their kids" ("How Marketers").

The guilt that parents feel raises another issue; psychology and marketing. Over recent years, advertisers use psychology to sell their product. What better way to sell, then to get into the inner constructs of the human psyche. "With the help of well-paid researchers and psychologists, advertisers now have access to in-depth knowledge about children's developmental, emotional and social needs at different ages" ("How Marketers"). This usage of psychologists in advertising is extremely clever. By bringing in professionals who understand what makes people "tick" so to speak, advertisers can perfect their tactics on getting kids to want their product.

But this use of psychology in advertising is not something to be taken lightly. In 1999, Gary Ruskin, head of Commercial Alert, and Allen Kanner, a clinical psychologist, wrote a letter to The American Psychological Association, or the APA. This letter targeted the misuse of psychology in the field of advertising. The letter's main statement was that psychologists were using their knowledge "to promote and assist the commercial exploitation and manipulation of children" ("Commercial Alert"). The letter went on further to state that psychologist's were "helping corporations influence children for the purpose of selling products to them" ("Commercial Alert"). Ruskin and Kanner appealed to the APA saying that the core reason that the APA was constructed; "to advance the understanding of the human psych in order to promote health", was being undermined by their association with advertising.

It is this exploitation and manipulation of children that Ruskin and Kanner, as well as 60 other psychologists that signed the letter, wanted to bring to the public eye. By manipulating and exploiting children, advertising has moved into a dangerous place. When children can no longer identify fact from fiction and believe in a fantasy world, is when advertising is doing a disservice to society. It makes one think that things can never be changed.

But in the letter sent to the APA, facts about how other countries handle advertising towards children were brought up. It spoke of the laws that protect children in other countries.

"Sweden and Norway prohibit television advertising directly targeting children below twelve years of age. Greece bans television advertising of toys to children between 7:00am and 10:00pm. Quebec prohibits television advertising directed at children below the age of thirteen. However, in the United States, children have no such protections, nor any protection against the use of psychological insights and expertise to manipulate or influence them" ("Commercial Alert").

It is this absence of protection from advertising for the children in American society that leaves us wondering about the consequences. Children are being manipulated and in this manipulation are being set up with a set of values that are dangerous:

"When advertisers use using psychological principles to sell products to children, they are not only selling that product, but they are also selling a larger value system that says making money and using your money for the purchase of material things will make you happy" (Hays).

Timothy Kasser, an associate professor of psychology at Knox College, who signed the letter to the APA and is quoted above, found through his research "that people who value goals like money, fame and beauty are not only more depressed than others, but also report more behavioral problems and physical discomfort, as well as scoring lower on measures of vitality and self-actualization" (Hays).

These aggressive and undermining tactics of advertisers are wronging our society. The tactics of weaving products into the everyday lives of children are at very least, unethical.

There is another side to this viewpoint. Dan Acuff, a psychologist, said in a New York Times article "if you're going to market to kids, do it responsibly and there are a whole lot of opportunities to make a positive difference" (Hays). The idea that there should be regulations on marketing towards children is a bright outlook in an otherwise dismal field. Acuff went on to say "we turn down opportunities that would be damaging to kids, like toys with serious weapons in them" (Hays). Of course this is a positive, but who is to say that anything besides violence isn't damaging to children.

Morality and ethics aside, there are other serious ways that advertising is getting to and damaging children. Who would ever think that schools would be places of marketing? But school systems are not untouched from the tactics of advertisers. Through the guise of education, corporations like Pizza Hut, Kraft and Campbell's have found their way into the classroom. Pizza Hut's reading incentive program and Kraft's healthy eating kit, to name two, promote an agenda through their product. "Campbell's Labels for Education project, in which Campbell provides educational resources for schools in exchange for soup labels collected by students" is a testimony to the clever tactics that advertisers will use to sell their product. By weaving their way into the education system, corporations hold a spot that is almost untouchable. Yes, they are supporting an important cause like reading or healthy eating, but at the same time manipulating their audience. (Hays).

Another concern of the affect of advertising on children is physical health. "Fast food chains spend more than 3 billion dollars a year on advertising, much of it aimed at children" ("Special Issues"). This targeting of children in the world of fast food is what leads to the obesity problem here in America. By fast food and junk food companies advertising during children's programming, they are bringing a huge group of consumers to their product.

"To directly target children, the fast food industry uses more than traditional commercials. Restaurants offer incentives such as playgrounds, contests, clubs, games, and free toys and other merchandise related to movies, TV shows and even sports leagues" ("Special Issues").

Children don't have the understanding that incentives are serving a larger agenda. They see the toy in the Happy Meal or the playground at the Burger King and focus on that aspect. Meanwhile, our children are becoming increasingly unhealthy. "A 2002 U.S. study showed that fast-food commercials during kids programming on Saturday mornings are pitching bigger and bigger portions, a trend that researchers link to the alarming rise of obesity among young people" ("Special Issues").

It is the compromising of children's health that advertisers are willing to make that raises red flags. By serving their own agenda, corporations will stop at what seems like nothing to sell their product. As consumers of the media, we must ask ourselves what is happening to our society. Eventually, the children of today will grow up. What kind of people will they grow up to be? By pushing materialistic goals upon children, advertisers are doing a great disservice to our society. They are teaching children that the only things that matter in this life are the things you buy, the things you own, and the things you eat. By using psychology in advertising, it is as if children are ill-fated from the start. When advertisers use psychological tactics to get into the minds of children, how much further can they go? By understanding the human psyche, marketing can create whatever outcome they wish. It is through all of these tactics that marketing towards children crosses the line from selling a corporation's product, to manipulating an unsuspecting victim.

Works Cited

"Commercial Alert, Psychologists, Psychiatrists Call for Limits on the Use of Psychology to Influence or Exploit Children for Commercial Purposes." Commercial Alert News Release 30 September 1999. http://www.commercialalert.org >

Grossberg, Lawrence, Ellen Wartella, and Charles D. Whitney. Media Making. Sage Publications, Inc. London 1998. pg 308-311.

Hays, Constance L. "Group says ads manipulate children." New York Times 22 October 1999.

"How Marketers Target Kids". The Media Awareness Network 2004.

"Special Issues for Young Children". The Media Awareness Network 2004.
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/issues_kids_marketing.cfm>