Pomeranz, J. (2010) 'Television Food Marketing to Children Revisited: The Federal Trade Commission Had the Constituan and Statutory Authority to Regulate.', Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, Volume 38, Issue 1, Pages 98-116.
It explores the theory that because young children do not and cannot comprehend that they are being advertised to, this form of communication is inherently conducive to deception and coercion.11 The specific marketing techniques employed by the food and beverage industry to advertise to children further demonstrate that this form of communication should not be considered protected by the First Amendment. FTC rulemaking in this area would thus be consistent with the First Amendment’s lack of protection for such speech. Although the argument may apply to marketing for all products, this paper relies on the science relevant to children and food marketing so the current analysis is limited to the FTC’s authority to restrict food market- ing directed at youth.
The scientific literature is robust and consistent in finding that food and beverage (hereinafter food) marketing influences children’s nutrition related beliefs and behaviors and that young children cannot perceive the difference between marketing intended to influence them and regular programming or purely factual information.
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) sought to determine the influence of food marketing on children and youth and published its findings in its 2006 report, Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity.12 The committee reviewed 123 published empirical studies13 and found “strong evidence” that television advertising affects the food and beverage requests and preferences of children ages two to eleven.14 The committee also found that food advertising increased children’s consumption of the advertised foods, at least in the short term.15 Similarly, Gerard Hastings et al. found strong evidence that food promotion affects children’s food purchasing-related behaviors and reasonably strong evidence that it influences their food preferences.16 Jennifer L. Harris et al. reported that the evidence indicates that television food advertising increases children’s preferences for the foods advertised and their requests to parents for those foods at both the brand and category level.17 Mary Story and Simone A. French reported that studies consistently show that children exposed to advertising will choose advertised foods significantly more than those who were not exposed, and purchase requests for specific brands or categories reflect those products’ advertising frequencies.18 In fact, the authors found that children most often request breakfast cereal, snacks, and beverages by brand name.19 This reflects the items most marketed to children on television.20
It explores the theory that because young children do not and cannot comprehend that they are being advertised to, this form of communication is inherently conducive to deception and coercion.11 The specific marketing techniques employed by the food and beverage industry to advertise to children further demonstrate that this form of communication should not be considered protected by the First Amendment. FTC rulemaking in this area would thus be consistent with the First Amendment’s lack of protection for such speech. Although the argument may apply to marketing for all products, this paper relies on the science relevant to children and food marketing so the current analysis is limited to the FTC’s authority to restrict food market- ing directed at youth.
The scientific literature is robust and consistent in finding that food and beverage (hereinafter food) marketing influences children’s nutrition related beliefs and behaviors and that young children cannot perceive the difference between marketing intended to influence them and regular programming or purely factual information.
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) sought to determine the influence of food marketing on children and youth and published its findings in its 2006 report, Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity.12 The committee reviewed 123 published empirical studies13 and found “strong evidence” that television advertising affects the food and beverage requests and preferences of children ages two to eleven.14 The committee also found that food advertising increased children’s consumption of the advertised foods, at least in the short term.15 Similarly, Gerard Hastings et al. found strong evidence that food promotion affects children’s food purchasing-related behaviors and reasonably strong evidence that it influences their food preferences.16 Jennifer L. Harris et al. reported that the evidence indicates that television food advertising increases children’s preferences for the foods advertised and their requests to parents for those foods at both the brand and category level.17 Mary Story and Simone A. French reported that studies consistently show that children exposed to advertising will choose advertised foods significantly more than those who were not exposed, and purchase requests for specific brands or categories reflect those products’ advertising frequencies.18 In fact, the authors found that children most often request breakfast cereal, snacks, and beverages by brand name.19 This reflects the items most marketed to children on television.20
Because the vast majority of food marketed to children is unhealthy, the net effect is that children are
developing poor nutrition-related beliefs and behaviors as a result of their exposure to such communication. Constant portrayals of children and beloved fictional characters eating, playing, or having fun with
unhealthy food normalize unhealthy eating behaviors,21 which has been found to contribute to childhood obesity.22
The scientific literature also reveals that unlike for
adolescents and adults, young children do not know
that advertisements are intended to influence them.
Marketing directed at young children may be manipulative due to this lack of understanding. The IOM’s
review of the scientific literature led the committee to
conclude that “most children ages 8 years and under
do not effectively comprehend the persuasive intent of
marketing messages, and most children ages 4 years
and under cannot consistently discriminate between
television advertising and programming.”23 The American Psychological Association’s Task Force on Advertising and Children (APA Task Force) similarly found
that “young children who lack the ability to attribute
persuasive intent to television advertising are uniquely vulnerable to such effects. Children below
age 7-8 years tend to accept commercial
claims and appeals as truthful and accurate because they fail to comprehend the
advertiser’s motive to exaggerate and
embellish.”24
A final issue involved in the unique nature of marketing directed at youth is that marketers openly use
their campaigns to encourage children to influence
the purchases made by their parents. This has been
called “pester power,”31 “the nag factor,”32 and “kid-influence”33 by the industry responsible for marketing to
children. The Report of the APA Task Force explained
it as follows: Along with the growth in marketing efforts
directed toward youth has come an upsurge in the use of psychological knowledge and research
to more effectively market products to young
children. There [are] an increasing number of
companies headed by people trained as child psychologists that specialize in market research on
children.... [Publications] draw upon principles
in developmental psychology and apply them to
the goal of more effectively persuading children to want advertised products and to influence their
parents to purchase these products.... [One study
by marketers] was designed to determine which
message strategy would most effectively induce
children to nag their parents to buy the advertised
product (‘The old nagging game’). 34
New emerging research reveals
distinct concerns for marketing via digital media and
that adolescents are uniquely vulnerable to market-
ers’ influence due to neurobiology susceptibility and
their early adoption of digital media.35 Although these
issues carry important public health repercussions,
more scientific research is needed in this area and the
First Amendment implications are outside the scope
of this paper.
12. Institute of Medicine (IOM), Food Marketing to Children
and Youth: Threat or Opportunity, (Washington, D.C.: The
National Academies Press, 2006): at 227.
16. G. Hastings, L. McDermott, K. Angus, M. Stead, and S. Thom- son, “The Extent, Nature and Effect of Food Promotion to Children: A Review of the Evidence,” Technical paper prepared for the World Health Organization, 2006.
17. J. L. Harris, J. L. Pomeranz, T. Lobstein, and K. D. Brownell, “A Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing Contrib- utes to Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done,” Annual Review of Public Health 30 (2009): 211-225.
18. M. Story and S. French, “Food Advertising and Marketing Directed at Children and Adolescents in the US,” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 1, no. 3 (2004): 1-17, at 11.
20. See FTC Report: Marketing Food to Children and Adolescents, July 2008, available at <http://www.ftc.gov/os/2008/07/ P064504foodmktingreport.pdf> (last visited January 11, 2010).
This article touches on some relevant points for my studies. The articles main subject is about how advertising and marketing constitutes protected commercial speech in the First Amendment which allowed them to remain unregulated and how the Federal Trade Commission has since put self-regulations in place. However, the points which I found relevant to my research are those in which talk about how children are affected by marketing. Children's nutrition related beliefs and behaviours are being influenced by marketers and they can't comprehend the difference in marketing intended to influence them and purely factual or regular programming.
There has been strong evidence found that television advertising affects the food and beverage requests and preferences of children aged 2-11, and also increases their consumption of the advertised foods in the short term. Studies also consistently show that children exposed to advertising will choose advertised foods significantly more than those who were not exposed, and purchase requests for specific brands or categories reflect those products’ advertising frequencies. It was also found that children most often request breakfast cereal, snacks, and beverages by brand name, which reflects the items most marketed to children on television.
The vast majority of food marketed towards children is unhealthy and shows their favourite characters eating, playing and having fun with the food/drink, thus normalising it to them. Children are developing poor nutrition-related beliefs and behaviours as an effect of their exposure to so many unhealthy food advertisements. This is one of the contributors to childhood obesity.
Marketing to children can be manipulative because they don't understand that the ads are intended to influence them, they can take them as truthful and factual because they don't understand the advertisers motive to exaggerate and embellish.
Marketers are openly using their techniques in order to encourage children to influence the purchases made by their parents. They are being clever about their techniques and a lot of thought goes into how they can get their product into the homes of children.
This article backs up a lot of subjects which I touched on in my survey. Not only are children being manipulated by marketers, but they are also being encouraged to manipulate their parents into buying them the products. Advertisers have been very tactical about this and they are definitely successful in doing so.
16. G. Hastings, L. McDermott, K. Angus, M. Stead, and S. Thom- son, “The Extent, Nature and Effect of Food Promotion to Children: A Review of the Evidence,” Technical paper prepared for the World Health Organization, 2006.
17. J. L. Harris, J. L. Pomeranz, T. Lobstein, and K. D. Brownell, “A Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing Contrib- utes to Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done,” Annual Review of Public Health 30 (2009): 211-225.
18. M. Story and S. French, “Food Advertising and Marketing Directed at Children and Adolescents in the US,” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 1, no. 3 (2004): 1-17, at 11.
20. See FTC Report: Marketing Food to Children and Adolescents, July 2008, available at <http://www.ftc.gov/os/2008/07/ P064504foodmktingreport.pdf> (last visited January 11, 2010).
This article touches on some relevant points for my studies. The articles main subject is about how advertising and marketing constitutes protected commercial speech in the First Amendment which allowed them to remain unregulated and how the Federal Trade Commission has since put self-regulations in place. However, the points which I found relevant to my research are those in which talk about how children are affected by marketing. Children's nutrition related beliefs and behaviours are being influenced by marketers and they can't comprehend the difference in marketing intended to influence them and purely factual or regular programming.
There has been strong evidence found that television advertising affects the food and beverage requests and preferences of children aged 2-11, and also increases their consumption of the advertised foods in the short term. Studies also consistently show that children exposed to advertising will choose advertised foods significantly more than those who were not exposed, and purchase requests for specific brands or categories reflect those products’ advertising frequencies. It was also found that children most often request breakfast cereal, snacks, and beverages by brand name, which reflects the items most marketed to children on television.
The vast majority of food marketed towards children is unhealthy and shows their favourite characters eating, playing and having fun with the food/drink, thus normalising it to them. Children are developing poor nutrition-related beliefs and behaviours as an effect of their exposure to so many unhealthy food advertisements. This is one of the contributors to childhood obesity.
Marketing to children can be manipulative because they don't understand that the ads are intended to influence them, they can take them as truthful and factual because they don't understand the advertisers motive to exaggerate and embellish.
Marketers are openly using their techniques in order to encourage children to influence the purchases made by their parents. They are being clever about their techniques and a lot of thought goes into how they can get their product into the homes of children.
This article backs up a lot of subjects which I touched on in my survey. Not only are children being manipulated by marketers, but they are also being encouraged to manipulate their parents into buying them the products. Advertisers have been very tactical about this and they are definitely successful in doing so.
No comments:
Post a Comment