Unethical Advertising

The Practice of North American Advertising to Children
in Relation to International Advertising Policy

Advertising to children is an important issue to many people.  The proof of this can simply be seen in the fact that an entire section of the DMOZ web directory (used by popular Internet gateways such as Netscape, Lycos, HotBot, Google and others[1]) contains an entire section with 19 sites devoted to it.[2] In comparison, it only lists seven sites for gender issues in advertising and only seven sites to critique political ads.  People are concerned about the effects of advertising, especially on children.  In reaction to this concern, the marketing industry has adopted policies for advertising practice that are “an expression of the business community's recognition of its social responsibilities”[3] and in turn, a guide for ethical decisions concerning advertising to children and the public in general. One of the most recognized of these codes is that of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) International Code of Advertising Practice Policy[4].  It is the aim of this paper to compare the ICC advertising ethics code to the actual practices of the North American marketing industry.

Recognizing Ads

            According to a comprehensive survey of international research, conducted by the respected Swedish sociologist Erling Bjurström, children under 12 may not be able to understand what an ad is, and how it is different from other forms of media productions[5]. This means that children under 12 may not be capable of recognizing an advertisement that is aimed at them.  According to article 12 of the ICC advertising code, “Advertisements should be clearly distinguishable as such, whatever their form and whatever the medium used;”[6]. This means that to follow the ICC guidelines, a business should not attempt to advertise to children under the age of 12. Realizing this relationship between the ethics code and the research, Sweden, Greece[7], Quebec[8] and other states severely limit TV advertising to children. Sweden has taken the leading role by banning all broadcast advertising to children under 12[9].  What is interesting is the lack of change this realization has had on the North American advertising inustry, (save Quebec). It is a common for large brands to target marketing campaigns to children as young as one; a practice known as “cradle to university” marketing.[10] The North American Better Business Bureau advertising code does not even specify that ads must be distinguishable as such[11]. Although there are many details about product representation and financial matters, compared to the ICC, the BBB code seems to be rather shallow in its attempt to protect the consumer from subversive marketing techniques, even when they are children. (NOTE: I have recently sent a short letter to the BBB addressing this issue of recognizing an advertisement as such. There may be subtleties pertaining to this issue in the code that I have overlooked. I will update this paper if a response warrants a change in the understood facts.)

Manipulating Children

            KidLeo, an established youth marketing consulting firm, recently published a report explaining the results of their extensive national survey of children that use the Internet.  Published in KidScreen, an international trade magazine, the report recommends that “To  successfully reach [kids], brands should project an ‘only for the coolest kids’ attitude” and that kids “...twig to resources that can help them fit in.”^[12]  KidLeo is suggesting that the advertising industry use marketing campaigns based on the fear of not fitting in or being cool (ie. gaining a social advantage). If we examine article 4 section 2 of the ICC advertising code, it states that “Advertisements should not without justifiable reason play on fear.”[13] If we continue down the ICC advertising code we will also find article 14a that says

“Advertisements should not suggest that possession or use of a product alone will give the child or young person physical, social or psychological advantages over other children or young people of the same age, or that non-possession of the product would have the opposite effect.”[14]

A convincing argument could be made that KidLeo is encouraging industry activities that are directly prohibited by the ICC advertising code.  North American advertisers are ignoring international ethics by manipulating children, turning kids fears of being ostracized into a consumer need.

Content or Commercial?

Another often ignored issue is that of products that are marketed through content.  From Pokemon, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, to Transformers, GI Joe, My Little Pony, and Strawberry Short Cake, each name represents both a product and a TV show.  If the media production promotes the sales of the product, then by definition, intent and result, the TV show is an advertisement that is not recognized as such.  Again this common North American practice is in direct violation of article 12 of the ICC code of advertising practice that requires ads to be recognized as such.  This type of issue also extends to movies, video games, web sites, playing cards and other media that use entertaining content to push the sales of products. It appears that in North America we do not even question the ethics of erasing the line between entertainment and marketing that is necessary to draw under the International code for advertising.

Commercials in the Classroom

Beyond advertising in entertainment, marketers are increasingly trying to reach children where they are most captive and unsuspecting; within their schools. The most obvious examples of in school campaigns are food and beverage contracts, in school posters and the Channel One in class TV news network[15].  But each of these techniques are obvious and therefor forced to follow common ethical advertising guidelines (although one could debate whether adverting in schools is an ethically sound practice to begin with). 

What is more disconcerting is the penetration of subtle marketing campaigns it to class curriculum.  “Marketers gain access through comprehensive educational programs for teachers.”[16][17] Some high profile North American corporations providing branded learning materials to under-funded schools in order to tap the youth market at its densest.  But do the students realize that their textbooks are ads and that their assignments are marketing schemes?  If not, then such disguised marketing techniques again do not follow article 12 of the ICC advertising industry code.  North American corporations are consistently using subversive marketing techniques and ignoring the internationally recognized policy of advertising ethics. 

Conclusion

From these few examples alone, one must begin to question what ethical principles the North American Advertising Industry does prescribe to. A basic overview of the Better Business Bureau’s codes will show that they are only concerned with protecting consumers on the level of product, sales, and financing.  There is no concern of how or whom an ad affects, as long as it does not lie.  What about the misuse of psychological techniques to manipulate our growing population?  The assault on naive children’s values and self-esteem? The degradation of our education system and the exploitation of students? These are some of the many concerns that are at the heart of the International Advertising Policy that is ignored by the North American advertising industry.

While we are often critical of our government and private citizens, we often ignore the misuse of power by corporate citizens.  If business can exist without such disregard of social responsibility and human dignity, (as it does in Sweden) then we as a society must begin to question our own ethics.  Is it acceptable to not act out against an industry that ignores ethical policies concerning children?