<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Advertising to children: right or wrong?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/</link>
	<description>Graphic and logo designer based in Edinburgh, UK, with a passion for logo design.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bob Calder</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-57896</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Calder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-57896</guid>
		<description>The mentions of cigarette advertising are so far incomplete. Everybody who has the least thing to do with advertising needs to know the whole story behind the history of generating doubt from the early 1950s through the massive judgements intended to punish the industry in the 1980s.

Without going through the whole story, let me tell you about the verdict itself. Lots of people think that it was to compensate the millions of injured people who bought into their fantasy. As the trial went forward, the court discovered that there had been a series of incredibly evil decisions made. Combined, they added up to a horrific total prompted by nothing more than a simple commercial venture. The court decided that the acts of the defendants merited a punishment that would dwarf the imagination. Certainly the public relations firm got off and the advertising agencies were held blameless. But the idea sprang from the brow of a public relations professional.

That's it. There are online archives and a &lt;a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cigarette-Papers-Stanton-Glantz/dp/0520213726/ref=sid_dp_dp" rel="nofollow"&gt;book&lt;/a&gt;. Nobody can wash their hands with a simple "It's the parent's fault."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The mentions of cigarette advertising are so far incomplete. Everybody who has the least thing to do with advertising needs to know the whole story behind the history of generating doubt from the early 1950s through the massive judgements intended to punish the industry in the 1980s.</p>
<p>Without going through the whole story, let me tell you about the verdict itself. Lots of people think that it was to compensate the millions of injured people who bought into their fantasy. As the trial went forward, the court discovered that there had been a series of incredibly evil decisions made. Combined, they added up to a horrific total prompted by nothing more than a simple commercial venture. The court decided that the acts of the defendants merited a punishment that would dwarf the imagination. Certainly the public relations firm got off and the advertising agencies were held blameless. But the idea sprang from the brow of a public relations professional.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s it. There are online archives and a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cigarette-Papers-Stanton-Glantz/dp/0520213726/ref=sid_dp_dp" rel="nofollow">book</a>. Nobody can wash their hands with a simple &#8220;It&#8217;s the parent&#8217;s fault.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swinefactory</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-55226</link>
		<dc:creator>Swinefactory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-55226</guid>
		<description>Been a while, but I thought that this might be an interesting addition to the thread:

&lt;a href="http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/2007/12/no-child-left-b.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;No child left behind ... over at McDonald’s&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Been a while, but I thought that this might be an interesting addition to the thread:</p>
<p><a href="http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/2007/12/no-child-left-b.html" rel="nofollow">No child left behind &#8230; over at McDonald’s</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob O.</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21678</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob O.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2007 19:49:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21678</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;…parents make the decisions for their children…&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No, not really.  You'd want to think so, but more often than not, no sir.  How else do you explain the fact that pre- and just-barely-pubescent kids are the ones who keep the scummy likes of 50 Cent, Eminem, and Snoop Dogg aflush with green?  Those children's purchasing choices aren't being governed or steered by the adults entrusted with their care.

Same with McD's.  Yes, there should be parental control in place to ensure that burgers, fries, &#38; chemical-laden strawberry shakes are the exception rather than the norm but there's plenty of evidence to the contrary.  Many parents just aren't paying much attention to anything their children consume - be it food, media, whatever.

So maybe it IS the government's place to step in.  What's the difference between a cigarette and a Whopper?  Neither one will kill you today.  Think carbs aren't just as addictive as nicotine?  I'd suggest they are...

But mostly, what concerns me most is the advertising that's in the schools.  You may choose to exert a great deal of control over what your kids consume at home, but what about those many hours that they're at school, bending to the will of peer pressure and the crushing forces of manipulative advertising?

The way the fast food &#38; "big soda" companies prey upon kids in school is kinda like shooting fish in a barrel.  I wish more parents would get riled up by this exploitatory behavior...  We're sheepishly allowing these companies to grow future consumers from the ground up...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>…parents make the decisions for their children…</p></blockquote>
<p>No, not really.  You&#8217;d want to think so, but more often than not, no sir.  How else do you explain the fact that pre- and just-barely-pubescent kids are the ones who keep the scummy likes of 50 Cent, Eminem, and Snoop Dogg aflush with green?  Those children&#8217;s purchasing choices aren&#8217;t being governed or steered by the adults entrusted with their care.</p>
<p>Same with McD&#8217;s.  Yes, there should be parental control in place to ensure that burgers, fries, &amp; chemical-laden strawberry shakes are the exception rather than the norm but there&#8217;s plenty of evidence to the contrary.  Many parents just aren&#8217;t paying much attention to anything their children consume - be it food, media, whatever.</p>
<p>So maybe it IS the government&#8217;s place to step in.  What&#8217;s the difference between a cigarette and a Whopper?  Neither one will kill you today.  Think carbs aren&#8217;t just as addictive as nicotine?  I&#8217;d suggest they are&#8230;</p>
<p>But mostly, what concerns me most is the advertising that&#8217;s in the schools.  You may choose to exert a great deal of control over what your kids consume at home, but what about those many hours that they&#8217;re at school, bending to the will of peer pressure and the crushing forces of manipulative advertising?</p>
<p>The way the fast food &amp; &#8220;big soda&#8221; companies prey upon kids in school is kinda like shooting fish in a barrel.  I wish more parents would get riled up by this exploitatory behavior&#8230;  We&#8217;re sheepishly allowing these companies to grow future consumers from the ground up&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vivienne Quek</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21557</link>
		<dc:creator>Vivienne Quek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2007 06:44:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21557</guid>
		<description>I like Jennifer's take on "Ultimately, it all comes down to personal responsibility (or parents being responsible for their kids), something a lot of people ignore these days. Nobody HAS to respond to advertising." Advertising is an art of persuasion. The advertiser can coat their message with sugars but he has no power to make you flip open you wallet to make a purchase if you don't want to. The control is with the consumer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like Jennifer&#8217;s take on &#8220;Ultimately, it all comes down to personal responsibility (or parents being responsible for their kids), something a lot of people ignore these days. Nobody HAS to respond to advertising.&#8221; Advertising is an art of persuasion. The advertiser can coat their message with sugars but he has no power to make you flip open you wallet to make a purchase if you don&#8217;t want to. The control is with the consumer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brett Evans</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21148</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:37:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21148</guid>
		<description>Hey thanks swinefactory, Yeah I don't know all that much about Canadian Law, but now I do :) I now have a better appreciate for your view point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey thanks swinefactory, Yeah I don&#8217;t know all that much about Canadian Law, but now I do :) I now have a better appreciate for your view point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swinefactory</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21140</link>
		<dc:creator>Swinefactory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:08:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21140</guid>
		<description>The following blog post over at adliterate explores the ethicality of different marketing approaches when dealing with children:

http://www.adliterate.com/archives/2005/03/the_ethics_of_m_1.html

...and you may want to give the following resources a read before you say that 'advertising to kids isn't a problem at all'.

http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/sbeder/children.html

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2004/9241591579.pdf</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The following blog post over at adliterate explores the ethicality of different marketing approaches when dealing with children:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.adliterate.com/archives/2005/03/the_ethics_of_m_1.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.adliterate.com/archives/2005/03/the_ethics_of_m_1.html</a></p>
<p>&#8230;and you may want to give the following resources a read before you say that &#8216;advertising to kids isn&#8217;t a problem at all&#8217;.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/sbeder/children.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/sbeder/children.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2004/9241591579.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2004/9241591579.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer Mattern</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21123</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Mattern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:04:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21123</guid>
		<description>It's the job of a business to make money. If their products appeal to kids (and are legal for their consumption), then advertising to kids isn't a problem at all. It's the parents' job to regulate what messages get to their kids and how (to a large degree), and it's also their job to teach the kids how to make better choices. That's certainly not a company like McDonald's responsibility.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s the job of a business to make money. If their products appeal to kids (and are legal for their consumption), then advertising to kids isn&#8217;t a problem at all. It&#8217;s the parents&#8217; job to regulate what messages get to their kids and how (to a large degree), and it&#8217;s also their job to teach the kids how to make better choices. That&#8217;s certainly not a company like McDonald&#8217;s responsibility.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swinefactory</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21110</link>
		<dc:creator>Swinefactory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21110</guid>
		<description>Brett - you said "Many years ago people were passionate about how dangerous cigarettes were to our young ones and what not. The people tried and failed at making a difference." 

I guess it's a bit different in Canada: Advertising tobacco has been illegal since 1988, and it's been illegal for a tobacco company to sponsor 'cultural' events (which they typically did to circumvent the no-ad law) since 2003.  I assumed that there were parallel mandates in the US, but it seems that this isn't the case.  That said, according to wikipedia,  it has been illegal to advertise cigarettes on tv or radio in the US since 1971, so clearly similar opinion exists south of the border as well.

As far as movies are concerned, in most provinces we have the 'AA' rating (adult accompaniment) which requires parental supervision under the age of 14. On the other hand, movies rated 'R' are restricted to anyone under 18, regardless of accompaniment by a legal adult.

I think it would be salient to point out that in both the case of tobacco and media marketing, there is no advertisment targetted at minors for products deemed unsuitable for minors, so it's not fair to compare the role of a parent in guiding a child's relationship to a product that wasn't marketed to them, versus one that was.  In either case the role of the parent in helping their child to make good decisions, and protecting them from bad ones is paramount, but this can become a very difficult task when a child or adolescent has been emotionally manipulated by marketing to associate consumption of goods with happiness.

No matter how you slice it, or dress it up, modern marketing isn't simply about the distribution of product or service knowledge, or increasing the visibility of a brand - it's about fabricating a fantasy vaule system in which people are subtly coerced to identify with a lifestyle and designing and marketing products that purportedly help the consumer to fulfill this lifestyle goal. Above and beyond the responsibility of parents to help children decode marketing messages, and become media literate, modern marketers are incredibly effective at their job, and are often much more persuasive than a parent can be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brett - you said &#8220;Many years ago people were passionate about how dangerous cigarettes were to our young ones and what not. The people tried and failed at making a difference.&#8221; </p>
<p>I guess it&#8217;s a bit different in Canada: Advertising tobacco has been illegal since 1988, and it&#8217;s been illegal for a tobacco company to sponsor &#8216;cultural&#8217; events (which they typically did to circumvent the no-ad law) since 2003.  I assumed that there were parallel mandates in the US, but it seems that this isn&#8217;t the case.  That said, according to wikipedia,  it has been illegal to advertise cigarettes on tv or radio in the US since 1971, so clearly similar opinion exists south of the border as well.</p>
<p>As far as movies are concerned, in most provinces we have the &#8216;AA&#8217; rating (adult accompaniment) which requires parental supervision under the age of 14. On the other hand, movies rated &#8216;R&#8217; are restricted to anyone under 18, regardless of accompaniment by a legal adult.</p>
<p>I think it would be salient to point out that in both the case of tobacco and media marketing, there is no advertisment targetted at minors for products deemed unsuitable for minors, so it&#8217;s not fair to compare the role of a parent in guiding a child&#8217;s relationship to a product that wasn&#8217;t marketed to them, versus one that was.  In either case the role of the parent in helping their child to make good decisions, and protecting them from bad ones is paramount, but this can become a very difficult task when a child or adolescent has been emotionally manipulated by marketing to associate consumption of goods with happiness.</p>
<p>No matter how you slice it, or dress it up, modern marketing isn&#8217;t simply about the distribution of product or service knowledge, or increasing the visibility of a brand - it&#8217;s about fabricating a fantasy vaule system in which people are subtly coerced to identify with a lifestyle and designing and marketing products that purportedly help the consumer to fulfill this lifestyle goal. Above and beyond the responsibility of parents to help children decode marketing messages, and become media literate, modern marketers are incredibly effective at their job, and are often much more persuasive than a parent can be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Airey :: Graphic Designer</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21096</link>
		<dc:creator>David Airey :: Graphic Designer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:27:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21096</guid>
		<description>Chris,

It's an honour that you'd spend your full day's blogging quota contributing to the discussion here! Your boys would be proud.

John,

The time-out for editing comments on my site is 15 minutes. Here's hoping it didn't take you that long to re-read your thoughts after submitting them. ;) Perhaps there was a glitch on my site, in which case I'd really appreciate you letting me know if it happens again.

Engtech,

I think it'd be great to teach our youngsters about the media. I never had any classes like you did when I was a kid, and in general I think the education systems should focus more on real world skills, like how to communicate properly, or applying for jobs etc.

Swine,

Thanks for keeping the discussion going. It's great to see more than one side to the debate.

Char,

It's crazy how McDonald's chains in the States have a whole different portion bracket than they do here in Europe. Here we get regular, medium and large, but I think you have extra large and super size too?

Brett,

Thanks for dropping in. You could be spot on about the kids relating the food to a playground, or a happy meal toy, for instance. Most likely, it's the fact that they're simply familiar with the brand, and with familiarity comes trust.

Jennifer,

Good of you to join in. Personal responsibility is the key, and I agree that Char hit the nail with moderation and portion control.

Cam,

Great discussion on your marketing site. Thanks for that, and for the valid point about movie ratings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris,</p>
<p>It&#8217;s an honour that you&#8217;d spend your full day&#8217;s blogging quota contributing to the discussion here! Your boys would be proud.</p>
<p>John,</p>
<p>The time-out for editing comments on my site is 15 minutes. Here&#8217;s hoping it didn&#8217;t take you that long to re-read your thoughts after submitting them. ;) Perhaps there was a glitch on my site, in which case I&#8217;d really appreciate you letting me know if it happens again.</p>
<p>Engtech,</p>
<p>I think it&#8217;d be great to teach our youngsters about the media. I never had any classes like you did when I was a kid, and in general I think the education systems should focus more on real world skills, like how to communicate properly, or applying for jobs etc.</p>
<p>Swine,</p>
<p>Thanks for keeping the discussion going. It&#8217;s great to see more than one side to the debate.</p>
<p>Char,</p>
<p>It&#8217;s crazy how McDonald&#8217;s chains in the States have a whole different portion bracket than they do here in Europe. Here we get regular, medium and large, but I think you have extra large and super size too?</p>
<p>Brett,</p>
<p>Thanks for dropping in. You could be spot on about the kids relating the food to a playground, or a happy meal toy, for instance. Most likely, it&#8217;s the fact that they&#8217;re simply familiar with the brand, and with familiarity comes trust.</p>
<p>Jennifer,</p>
<p>Good of you to join in. Personal responsibility is the key, and I agree that Char hit the nail with moderation and portion control.</p>
<p>Cam,</p>
<p>Great discussion on your marketing site. Thanks for that, and for the valid point about movie ratings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cam Beck</title>
		<link>http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21081</link>
		<dc:creator>Cam Beck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:22:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidairey.com/advertising-to-children-right-or-wrong/#comment-21081</guid>
		<description>Keep in mind that kids are in fact allowed into rated R movies when they're accompanied by a parent. In both the movie case and the fatty foods case, the parent is responsible for exercising discernment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep in mind that kids are in fact allowed into rated R movies when they&#8217;re accompanied by a parent. In both the movie case and the fatty foods case, the parent is responsible for exercising discernment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.250 seconds -->
