Implication of Unlimited and Uncontrolled Advertising to Children - Research Proposal Example

Introduction The marketing industry is one that is prone to exploitation by some stakeholders and some key members of the industry. This include thepossibility of abusing information and data to the advantage of some entities and organisations. Children form a class of vulnerable people in the society. By default, children do not possess the level of maturity one will expect of an adult and consenting member of the society. Until recently, in legal terms, the concept of doli incapax was used to protect children from prosecution and this is steeped in the fact that it was assumed that children were not capable of taking malicious decisions (Commission on Families and the Wellbeing of Children, 2005). This research will involve a critical review of the regulation and legislation that guides advertising to children. To this end, the research will focus on evaluating and analysis the various rules and regulations that guide the marketing and proliferation of information meant for children under the age of 16. Background of Advertising to Children In the 1930s, businesses and corporate entities in the UK created clubs and national food advertisers embedded their advertising to children in popular culture (Asquith, 2014). This provided the impetus for the creation of a system through which brand socialisation became the norm, rather than the exception. Children were expected to socialise and identify with various stars and brands like Snow White and Mickey Mouse in order to get an identification and connection to various brands. This system made children brand-conscious and since there were few laws limiting corporate entities that that time, the businesses built a tradition of seeking brand-consciousness and brand-loyalty amongst child-consumers (Asquith, 2014). However, this position proved to be problematic because it came with various unorthodox issues and matters. First of all, children lack the ability to make informed choices and take decisions based on a clear conscience at the standard of a consenting adult. Secondly, children in the UK have often been kept from the workforce. Hence, they have limited earning capacity and cannot pay for their products. The legal struggle against child labour came to the fore after the Second World War. And this meant that children were solely reliant on their parents for money to pay for products. Hence, there was the need for corporate entities to be limited in their quest to entice children and get them to be addicted or connected to their brands as a means of making money and enhancing their earning capacities. Implication of Unlimited and Uncontrolled Advertising to Children Various studies have been presented on the impact of uncontrolled advertisements to children. One of them conducted by Pettigrew et al (2013) indicated that aggressive advertising tactics by corporate entities got parents and children to assess various brands to be assessed favourably. In other words, the advertising caused both parents and children to be so much desirous and expectant of given products and this proved to be problematic to families. This is because products that have adverse health implications that are properly advertised are likely to be seen in a positive light, and this will prove to be problematic and issue ridden. So, in spite of the fact that the products will be purchased, they will have detrimental effects to the consumers, notably children and this will have an adverse impact on the society at large. Pettigrew et al (2013) also discovered that adults are not immune to adverts. Whilst adults are judged to be more astute and more inclined to understand what they are signing up for, they are still prone to being misled into making wrong choices through adverts. Thus, there is the need for some kind of controls to be placed upon advertising to prevent the abuse and misuse of communication channels by corporate entities that will seek to push their products in a way that proves to be detrimental to children and in some cases, adults, who make bad choices that affect children. The detrimental effects of uncontrolled advertising that Pettigrew et al (2013) discovered was that it leads to issues like product reliance and child obesity and related health consequences. This is because aggressive advertising of harmful foods, particularly sugar tend to create problems and issues for children and their families and hence, must be controlled in one way or the other. Another element of concern in advertising and promotion of products to children is the emergence of the new media, which includes the Internet. The Internet is a major force that enables children from the UK to a access sites in different parts of the world. Some of these nations have little or no regulations that deals with childrens health and childrens needs or requirements. In a study conducted by Cai and Zhao (2013), they identified that about half of the Internet sites that advertised and promoted information to children had adverts. And less than half of these sites with adverts complied with relevant advertising rules. This means that approximately 25% of the sites that children frequently visit expose them to unethical advertising and rules. This exposes children to various forms and levels of dangers that causes them to purchase products and services that are not appropriate or helpful to them. The implication is that the new media, which includes the Internet has come to modify the platform of information sharing. This include the exposure of children to various types and forms of information that is shared by different stakeholders and different parties in the socialisation of children and the presentation of brands. The Internet and the fact that it has different national standards provides various kinds of risks that leads to problems and issues (Galbraith-Emani and Lobstein, 2013). This shows that there is a new risk that is posed by the new media and it comes with unique and distinct challenges. There is a psychological element of controlling advertising to children. Hackey (2010) identifies that adverts have a strong emotional and psychological attachment to things they see in the media. Hence, they is the need for some kind of controls and checks to be placed on adverts that are exposed to children (Hackey, 2010). Legal Framework The United Kingdom is subject to the European Union treaties and directives (White, 2000). This is because the European Union provides a supranational entity that constitutes rules and regulations that guide various states. This forms a major framework and system that shape the rules and regulations to be made in a given country. The European Union Visual Media Services Directive states that adverts must not exploit children and they should not have any form of adverse physical impact on children. The EU Visual Media Services Directives also prohibits adverts that encourage children to harass their parents. This include the banning of adverts that will considerably cause danger to minors. As a general process, the EU directives are meant to provide guidelines and processing to nations. Nations are meant to make laws that are compatible to these EU directives and get them to work to attain the proper and appropriate ends that are interpreted in the legal system or structures. Thus, with the UK being a self-regulatory nation, the country has various arrangements that intersect with the advertising to children (Wilmshurst and Mackay, 2002) and they include amongst others: 1. Contracts 2. Defamation and libel 3. Misleading adverts and 4. Obscenity, indecency and blasphemy (White, 2000) In the area of contract, basic Common Law procedures are used to prevent children from participating in adverts that are likely to appeal to children. This makes it difficult for children to partake in adverts that may not be positive to them. There are rules relating to defamation and libel as well as laws that requires adverts to be made in good faith, rather than in a misleading manner. Also, children fall in the broad framework of people protected from obscenity and indecent content which could prove to be problematic to audiences (White, 2000). There are specific rules for various matters relating children and this include safety, violence and other food products that could be problematic to the health of children (Wilmshurst and Mackay, 2002). And this come together to influence the kind of regulation that are put together to protect children. Framework of Laws Protecting Children in Advertising Situations in the UK The United Kingdom has various public entities and lobby groups that regulate advertising and promotion of goods and services in the country. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has the role to ensure that adverts are reviewed and analysed in order to comply with important rules and regulations. The fundamental responsibility of ASA in relation to advertising to children involves the presentation of truthful information that is based on facts that are reasonably true. The ASA also has the primary duty to ensure that advertisements targeting children do not harm children in anyway. This means that such adverts need to be reasonable and must not contain information that will exploit children or abuse their status as people who cannot take informed decision. The vulnerability of children is therefore a key and primary aspect and element of the affairs of the ASA. The British Code of Advertising and Sales Promotion Practice (BCASP) provides some fundamental codes and ideas that guide advertising in the UK including childrens adverts (White, 2000). This include the need for legal, decent, responsible and non-disruptive adverts and confidentiality codes (White, 2000). The ASA has the AdCheck program which critically assesses ads and programs that are aired and screened for children. They are therefore meant to identify adverts that harm children or are offensive. The ASA commissioned the Bailey Review which analysed and evaluated the industry. Through the Bailey Review, there were five main processes and procedures that were instituted to ensure that adverts to children were screened and regulated to ensure that they were of the right content and processes. They include: 1. Parents Port: This is a system through which parents were able to set parental guidance checks on most media outlets including televisions and the Internet to ensure that only the right adverts were screened or shown to their children. 2. Tougher Line on Sexual Imagery on Outdoor Ads: There was a tougher position taken to prevent the showing of sexual images in outdoor ads. Obviously, children could have access to such ads, and as such, they were able to control the content of information that was opened to the public, including children. 3. New Research: The ASA sought to promote a proactive model or system for the evaluation of new trends in the markets and deal with them. This include the institution of different activities and processes that clamped down on illegal ads and ads that were inappropriate. 4. More information for parents: This was a process through which advertisers were to disclose more information that could enable parents to make an informed choice and an informed system of choices that would help children to get the best from products that were sold to them. 5. Ad Check: Adverts to children were to be screened and checked. Where adverts to children failed the tests and processes, they were banned from being aired on British media outlets. Other Agencies Aside the ASA that has a statutory oversight on the content of adverts that are made in a nation, there are other entities and agencies like the OFCOM (ESRC, 2013). OFCOM is an independent regulator of the competitive media environment of the UK. Their primary duty is to ensure that information given by entities in the form of adverts and other things do not contravene basic rules and regulations Additionally, they have to ensure that some sections of the UK society including children are protected from false and misleading advertisements. OFCOM has banned high fat and high salt adverts on childrens programmes (ESRC, 2013). This is because they are against competitive practices and they are not in good faith as they tend to get children to consume products that are not healthy for them. Also, there are restrictive broadcasting processes and procedures that are meant to ensure that children are protected from activities and products that are not very good to their health. Thus, as a regulator of competition with the view of promoting fair trading practices, these entities work together to attain results for the protection of children from negative processes and procedures in media adverts. In 2007, restrictions where placed on high fat, salt and sucar adverts in the UK and this was meant to ban such adverts to persons under 16 (Great Britain Parliament, 2011). Adverts relating to sexual content and acts and anti-social behaviours were restricted in 2005. Rules were tightened and controls were tightened to prevent abuse by Parliament. Conclusion The research indicates that children are a vulnerable section of society. They therefore deserve to be protected and prevented from negative practices. The absence of such rules and regulations indicate that companies and entities can exploit children with negative and detrimental adverts that can cause them to consume inappropriate products and foods. Also, children are not the only ones affected by this. Parents are also targeted by such negative practices. The Internet and new media adds up to the challenge and it promotes inappropriate adverts and promotions that are detrimental to children. The general framework of rules and regulations that are meant to prevent children from being exploited by such entities is steeped in EU rules and regulations. This include European Union directives that form a supranational framework of laws that guide nations. This include laws against adverts that involve products that causes harm to children and products that causes children to harass their parents. The EU framework and directives guard the national laws of EU member nations. In the UK, the ASA is the authority charged with regulating adverts including adverts targeting children. Hence the ASA has come up with reasonable arrangements to screen adverts and empower parents to become partners with regulators to deal with childrens concerns in production. Other entities like OFCOM set rules and regulations that guide the way adverts are presented to children. References Advertising Standards Authority (2012) Children and Advertising Review London: TSO. Asquith, K. (2014) “Join the Club: Food Advertising, 1930s: Childrens Advertising Culture and Brand Socialisation” Popular Communication January – March 12(1) pp17 – 31 Cai, X. and Zhao, X. (2013) “Online Advertising on Popular Childrens Websites: Structural Factors and Privacy Issues” Computers and Human Behaviour July 29(4) pp1510 – 1518 Commission on Families and the Wellbeing of Children (2005) Families and the State – Two-Way Support and Responsibilities Bristol: Policy Press. Economic and Social Research Council (2013) “Courting Children;s Exposure to Advertisements” London: ESRC Galbraith-Emani, S. and Lobstein, T. (2013) “The Impact of Initiatives to Control the Advertising of Food and Beverage Products To Children: A Systematic Review” Obesity Reviews Dec 2013 14(12) pp960 – 974 Great Britain Parliament (2011) Regulation of Television Advertisement: 1st Report of Session 2010 – 2011 London: TSO Hackey, C. (2010) Advertising and Promotion London: SAGE Pettigrew, S, Tarabaskina, L and Roberts, M. (2013) “The Effects of Television and Internet Food Advertising on Parents and Children” Public Health Nutrition 16(12) pp2205 – 2212 Wilmshurst, J. and MacKay, A. (2002) Fundamentals of Advertising Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann White, R. (2000) Advertising London: McGraw Hill. Read More