S/M/173. Dissertation. Advertising to Children: Creating Savvy Consumers of Tomorrow, or Generating Materialistic and Consumerist Attitudes?

In Europe and the USA, the subject of advertising to children is one that causes much debate. The arguments against include that the promotion to children breeds consumerism and new generations of ‘must-have’ consumers. Many people believe that it has a negative effect on children’s health and well being. The school of thought in favour is based on the belief that children need to be encouraged to decode information they are exposed to (Jackson, 2003). Much of the debate about the role of children as consumers has centred on whether or not they should be protected from marketing and in particular television advertising (Furnham 2000). The ‘ethical’ argument suggests that children below eight years old are unable to decode advertising intent and are therefore vulnerable to improper manipulation by marketers. The alternative view, more generally accepted by the advertising industry is that is that advertising is only one of many influences on a child’s purchasing behaviour, and in fact helps to develop a critical sense of the culture the child finds itself in. Critics are calling for greater regulation of adverts on the basis that advertising appeals to our emotions not our intellect (Wilcox et al 2004) and while adults can make a rational distinction between the two, it is widely assumed that children cannot. Children have become of great interest to retailers in the last few years, not only as primary consumers, but as influencers of secondary consumption. McNeal (1992) suggested that children on average make 15 purchase requests in a typical shopping trip, and also estimated that between 40% and 80% of these were granted. For this reason, retailers have been keen to set up ‘conflict situations’ between children and parents in an attempt to influence a purchase decision. In context, retailers are giving children ‘pester power’. ‘Pester power’ can take on a number of forms depending on the age and sophistication of the child. Marketers aim to plant a seed of recognition within the mind of a child in the hope that the initial brand awareness will create a life-long relationship between the consumer and the brand (Klein 1999). Some research has concluded that children as young as six months can form mental images of corporate logos and brand loyalties can be established as early as age two. By the time a child starts school at age five, it is estimated that they can recognise over three hundred brand logos (Klein 1999). Although from a commercial perspective, marketing to children is a highly lucrative and profitable business activity, certain pressure groups argue that this manipulation of children at such a young and influential age is wrong. Many people disagree with targeting young children in order to create brand loyalty on the basis that the practice breeds consumerism and materialist attitudes in children, which themselves will last a lifetime. However, banning advertising to children is unlikely to be the best method for teaching children about the consumer society we live in, which allows conclusions to be drawn that suggest education, parental control and advertising industry considerations are the best methods to help children develop into savvy consumers of tomorrow. It is not necessary to ban all advertising to children, but younger children may not always be educated to a level where they can fully understand the notion of advertising. Parents of young children have an important role to play in protecting their children from invasive marketing and educating them about advertising and its persuasive intent. If a parent is unhappy at the levels of advertising their child is exposed to, then it is their responsibility as a parent to remove the child from that situation. In summary, advertising to children is neither exploitative nor harmful, where children’s development into sensible consumers is hindered is the lack of education and encouragement they receive from parents, schools and governments. A child needs to learn about advertising intent and the most effective way to do this is through education, not advertising restrictions. There is an argument for the limitation of advertising to younger children, as well as more consideration from retailers about conflict within families when children demand certain products, but research has shown that adverting is only one very small part of the catalyst that instigates a purchase from a child. It would be far more beneficial for today’s children, if they were taught how to decode advertising intent and then make their own informed choices about which products they want to purchase rather than banning advertising entirely.