article: Kidfluence - advertising to children
October 9, 2003
CBC Radio Commentary
To many of us a commercial on TV is time for a break. But not for a lot of kids according to Shari Graydon. She says the younger ones especially don't have the skills to separate the ads from the program. She's a media analyst and educator who's just written a book on advertising for children. On Commentary she says something must be done: our kids are too vulnerable to ads.
Shari Graydon:
Last week Corus Entertainment announced it was seeking advertisers who wanted to influence parents' buying habits by targeting their kids. For the uninitiated, this is known as "kidfluence," or exploiting the "nag factor."
The strategy isn't new: advertisers have been encouraging kids to pressure their parents to buy sugared cereal for decades. But now they're adding cars, electronics and banking services to the "kid-fluence" shopping cart. What's more shocking is that they're targeting not just teens and "tweens," but "tinies" - a market demographic that includes kids still in diapers.
Apparently, this works. Four years after Camel cigarettes introduced a cartoon character into its ads, "Joe Camel" was as familiar to 5-year-olds as Mickey Mouse, even though he was selling a product off limits to anyone under 16. But you can never start too young. As one marketing guru advised advertisers, "If you own this child at an early age, you can own this child for years to come."
Our kids are walking, talking evidence of the educational effectiveness of commercial culture. They've learned that cool clothes are the keys to popularity; that boredom is best resolved by buying something today you're likely to throw away tomorrow; and that fast food is the answer to pretty much everything else.
Physical fitness levels are declining as obesity rates soar. Boys are sacrificing social skills and school scores in pursuit of manual dexterity with the latest Playstation, and girls are struggling with the contrast between the fashion industry's definition of beauty and their reflections in the mirror.
What's a parent to do?
Media education is one solution: given the right tools and frequent timely reminders, kids can be taught to embrace a buyer-beware mode. Knowing that the hamburger only appears juicy on TV because it's covered in Vaseline, or that the supermodel's perfect looks have been graphically enhanced, can change how they relate to ads. But it takes a lot of time and effort to counter the hundreds of thousands of promotional messages they're exposed to every year. So some European countries, and the province of Quebec, have just said "no." They've banned advertising aimed at children under 13. Their economies haven't fallen apart, and their kids are probably a lot healthier.
Public pressure forced the U.S. government to ban Joe Camel. So I'm hoping that current concerns about rising rates of childhood diabetes, eating disorders, and anabolic steroid abuse - all influenced by advertising - can be translated into a different kind of "nag factor" - by adults, on politicians.
We don't need more proof: Advertising to kids whose cognitive wiring isn't sophisticated enough to recognize and challenge persuasive appeals should be illegal. Just scream until they cave.
For Commentary, I'm Shari Graydon in Ottawa.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eartheasy
. ........ .....top
