Why Do Advertisements Target Children

In “Marketing To Children Gets More Savvy” they use real life ads to explain their writing. They talk about how children now more than ever have technology surrounding them, along with ads that come with it. For example, Webkinz, a kid gaming website, has ads posted everywhere. Webkinz has had ads on the side of the website that tells kids that if they watch an advertisement and answer all the questions from the video, they then can get a prize from Webkinz. When mothers were told about this they said that they had no idea that is was happening, even if it was in their

Children are easily influenced, and this can be taken advantage of in the commercial industry. Thy have the desire to fit in and do what is considered “cool”. Many people believe that people use this desire to their own benefit in order to create profit. While it’s true children are easily manipulated by commercials, these commercials and be beneficial to the child's development. Commercials can be used to bring good ideas and good life skills to children that will lead them to being a successful adults. Commercials aimed at children are ethical because they can reinforce positive behaviors and good ideals. This is shown through articles, press and reports.

Advertisements also affect a child's own identity because "advertising manipulates [children] through their insecurities, working to define normality for them" (Source C). Children, especially pre-teens and teenagers, are essentially going through a multitude of crises with the most prominent one being and identity crisis. Figuring out who one is, is a vital step towards adulthood and independence, and with advertisements altering children's thoughts and ideas, their futures are not looking as bright. Without a sense of self, humans are nothing. They are simply mindless creatures just trying to survive. They have no intellectual independence and therefore, inventions, ideas, and discoveries will begin to slowly diminish. But, the manipulative ways of advertising can in facts be positive. With 15,312 promotions and public service announcements seen by children and teens annually (Source A), the world has a high chance of new generations of innovators and environmental heroes. If advertisements can, in a sense, manipulate children into doing positive things and taking actions, then yes, advertising to children is an extremely clever thing to do, and will benefit not only the viewers, but the world in

Children between the ages of 8 and 18 spend a whopping 44.5 hours in front of media sources that are possibly displaying these ads. Research has shown that children less than age 8 cannot tell that the advertisements are merely trying to be persuasive. Children under age 6 cannot even tell the difference between an advertisement and a program. Yet

In this essay, “ What are commercials selling to children,” John J.O’ Connor writer that commercials sell not only products, but also stereotypes, attitudes languages and value. The point commercials are also used to change people's ideas. More to the point, they sell attitudes and values is the racism. Television may not show it, but it is obvious. Commercial make them feel and impact. For instance, described blue-haired dolls with blond hair and a perfect body. There are reports of how girls should look. However, for blacks and Hispanic children, they feel clearly lower. The majority of people does not understand this is a manifestation of

Many people believe that everything is black and white, especially when it comes to advertisements. What many don’t understand is that everything has an underlining meaning. Every advertisement has been thought out thoroughly to catch the attention of the consumers it is aiming towards. Advertisements aiming towards children has definitely been a topic that many people can’t seem to wrap their mind around. It’s been a topic that many have exposed because of the way marketers are willing to manipulate children in ways that only benefit their own. This whole issue began after the progression of marketing to children during the late 70s and early 80s with the advertisers’ intentions of making children lifelong consumers of products.

It is easier to influence someone who cannot comprehend that they are being influenced. This is ultimately Eric Schlosser’s main argument in his case against the mass marketing scheme aimed at children. Our subconscious influences our decisions more than we are probably aware. As we grow older, we recognize this; children, however, do not possess the same capacity to discern this as we do — and so, their naivety is exploited by marketing companies. These companies make their ads to appeal to the factors their target audience desperately (albeit unconsciously) seek. Whether it be by creating a sense of belonging, exclusiveness, and contentedness to the customers, their tactics are subtle enough to lure a wide array of people.

From two years children cannot know the difference between advertising and actual TV programs . Between 3 to 6 years , they Can identify an advertisement and distinguish it from programming , but they cannot understand that advertising are trying to sell an product . in addition , they think advertisements as being enjoyable or helpful . Between 7 – 12 years they Can understanding that advertising are trying to sell something . Also , they

According to the article “Facts About Marketing to Children”, the average kid is exposed to 40,000 ads a year, nearly 100 a day. This leads to what is known as the “nag factor” which means that kids have lots of control over what their parents buy based on what they ask for, or nag their parents about. Being exposed to this many ads lead them to ask their parents an average of 9-50 times, even though they may not actually want or need them; they might have just seen a cool looking ad for the

Marketing to children is not a new phenomenon; however, there have been many ethical debates on its rightness; is advertising to children a gentle persuasion of the innocent or a sinister threat to our society? There’s too much as stake if we remain silent and simply assume that marketing companies have our children’s best interests at heart; the truth is they don’t. This paper will explore to implications of marketing to children and the overall effects it has on our society. I will argue that advertising to children is a social problem. In the first part of my paper I will discuss why advertising to children is ethically wrong, I will then discuss what has changed; this will be followed by a discussion as to why it is a social problem and finally, I will conclude my paper by discussing what should be done to change it. Please note this paper is written in the first person as I have children and I have a vested interest in this topic.

Marketers understand that no child is too young to be targeted by television; many of these programs are linked directly to commercial products. For example, Burger King then McDonald 's sponsored the public television show "Teletubbies" (show for toddlers). McDonald 's distributed toys of the four characters in their happy meals. It is estimated that advertising for children has now reached over $1 billion. The most common advertised foods seen are not surprisingly low in nutritional value; products such as, presweetened breakfast cereals, candy, fast food, sodas, cookies, and chips. Its safes to say the money isn 't being spent on advertising of fruits, vegetables, bread, or fish.

The only way using a child to advertise could be harmful, would be if they are promoting violence. Many children advertise new toy's, clothing, breakfast foods, and new television series' etc. In that, depending on the humor, cast, and genre could you label it harmful, or not. Both passages mention that it is only a money making industry, for both the business

Although not all will see it in this way. Some say that advertisements directed at children relay negitive messages; such as, happiness can be bought. While some will counteract saying it is up to the parent(s)/guardian(s) to regulate what messages are relayed.

Children are similar to brand new sponges. Kids absorb everything you put in front of them. If you model bad behavior, they reenact the conduct. So, if you put a child in front of a television that exposes bad foods and rebellious behavior, therefore the kid now witnessed a terrible type of habit and could easily decide to mimic it. As an adult, it’s much easier to perceive that television is all acting, but a child’s brain is very vulnerable to anything that appears in front of them. A child is the easiest consumer companies can wield to want their products due to their ignorance upon how the real world works. If an advertising company asks children questions about what types of toys they like, or something like questioning what their favorite kinds of ads are, they wouldn’t see the unethical reasoning behind theses questions. Without a doubt, there certainly should be a limit to how advertisers approach children. The next question is, who is responsible for how much the children get exposed to ads? The answer is not just the company, or parents. Exposure to ads is the accountability to both the markets and parents.

Advertisements targeting children should be banned in the United States. Children do not understand that companies will do anything to make money. Companies do not care if they are making kids fat or selling then cheap toys. As long as they are making their money then they are happy. That is not right or fair to parents. Children do not have jobs. Therefore parents are responsible for buying their kids what they need and want. When a child views these advertisements all they see is the pictures that come with it. Companies spend a lot of time creating advertisements that will lure young children into wanting whatever it is they are advertising. Children are to young to relize that not everything is what it seems to be. I understand that a businesses