Hard sell soft targets parents talk about marketing to children report

In a MORI poll carried out by
the NFPI, 84 per cent of parents
thought that companies targeted
their children too much.
Parents told us that they felt their
children were bombarded with TV
adverts, particularly after school
and in the morning on Saturdays
and Sundays.
Parents have noticed that
marketing is targeting children at a
younger and younger age, and are
aware that their younger children
are more susceptible to advertising
than their older children.
Parents were aware and anxious
about the growth of other forms of
marketing. They knew that their
children were being targeted via
the internet and text messages,
but felt uninformed about those
new forms of communication.
Parents were particularly irritated
at the massive growth and ubiquity
of product tie-ins, often arising
from a TV programme, like the
Tweenies, or a ﬁlm, such as
Finding Nemo.
Parents thought that this high
level of marketing did affect their
children adversely. They spoke
of marketing being important
in shaping and forming their
children’s view of themselves and
the world around them, but also
their dismay at the way in which
marketing encouraged spending,
a throw away mentality and
dissatisfaction.
Parents admitted to feeling put
under pressure to make certain
purchases because of what their
children had seen on television
or in the shops. Although parents
may have sometimes resisted that
pressure, all spoke of the extra
aggravation and arguments, tears
and tantrums that it could cause.
They hated having to explain to
their children that they couldn’t
afford the item, particularly if all
their child’s friends already had it.
3
National Family and Parenting Institute
Hard sell, soft targets?
Key findings and recommendations

Parents believed that it was
their responsibility to deal with
marketing to children. Most
saw their responsibility as
exercising restraint on their
children’s demands, and trying
to explain what marketing was
all about to their children. Few
of them believed that they could
realistically reduce their children’s
exposure to marketing.
Parents were unsure about
whether regulation would achieve
anything, but came up with some
specific proposals, like stopping
the advertising of junk food on
television.
On the basis of research, discussions
and our consultation with parents, the
NFPI recommend that:
Advertising to under-5s should be
banned on pre-school TV.
Advertising junk food should be
banned during children’s TV.
Research should be commissioned
on the cumulative effect of
blocks of adverts re-occurring
frequently on children’s television,
to ascertain whether codes of
practice need to be amended.
Options to bring together all the
broad, strategic issues to do with
marketing to children should be
investigated. There is a need for a
new or existing organisation to
act as a watchdog on behalf of
parents and children. Its remit
should cover all aspects of
marketing, and it should work with
the industry to develop guidelines
and good practice.
Vending machines selling
carbonated drinks, sweets, crisps
and other snacks should be banned
from schools, and each school
should ensure that it has enough
working water fountains.
Parents should be informed by
their children’s schools of any
company marketing initiatives, for
example, Jazzybooks.
A review of BBC commercial
activities which target children
should be undertaken, for
example, tie-ins with food
products in supermarkets.
Ofcom and TV companies should
be obliged to advertise how to
complain, and take all measures
to ensure that parents know
the process.
Why worry? As some parents in the
discussions said, there has always
been advertising, and there always
will be. There was no golden age when
children were not exposed to marketing
forces. Is there a danger that as in so
many other areas of their lives, adults
are restricting their choices and
independent decision-making through
being overprotective? In the desirable
aim to keep them from harm, are
adults actually making it harder for
children to develop the skills they
need in later life?
After all, children are not passive
objects; they deal with hundreds of
messages of different kinds from
parents, friends, school, neighbours
as well as television, the internet and
other forms of communication. They
will need to understand our complex
and sophisticated society. They will
need to develop analytical skills and a
certain toughness.
Even so, there are many reasons to
be worried. Marketers are after our
children. Advertising is big business.
Marketing happens on a global scale.
The food industry worldwide
spends $40 billion on food
advertising alone, more than the
Gross Domestic Product of 70% of
the world’s nations.3
In 2001 advertisers spent £161
million on selling chocolate and
sweets in the UK, much of it
directed at children.
£34 million was spent on ads for
crisps and snacks.
Just £10.2 million was spent
promoting frozen and fresh
vegetables and just £5 million
on fruit.4
The current value of the UK toy
market is £1.9 billion5
, and that of
the worldwide toy market is (2000)
$54,742 million.
Marketing is not only directed at
children, but evidence suggests that
marketers and advertising agencies
are targeting children both in their
own right and to reach adults. The
pre-school market alone is worth £4.3
billion a year,6
but the consumer goods
market many millions more than that.
If it is true that children are increasingly
influential in decisions to buy cars,
computers, household goods, even
holidays, then they can expect no let-
up from the attentions of advertisers.
Marketing and building
brand loyalty is
a business with
very high stakes,
where more measured
consideration of the
longer term effects is
absent. But parents are
precisely concerned with such issues.
They must take the long term view
because theirs is a long term project
– helping their child reach independence
and maturity. Parents want to do the
right thing for their children, but they
don’t raise kids in a vacuum. Parents
are influenced by pressures they feel
are outside their control: pressure
from other parents, from the media,
from government – and pressure
from companies marketing their
products. Their own childhood seems an
inadequate frame of reference, but just
as outside pressures seem to be piling
up, so too are parents expected to do
it alone. Bringing up children is, more
than ever, an individual task; children
are becoming isolated from their
communities and parents often blamed
for everything from obesity to crime.
Lacking clear information, and caught
between the pressures from marketers
and business and the demands of their
children, parents can find themselves in
a hard place.
“
”
Over the last ten years,
marketing aimed at
children and tweens
has developed beyond
the old single
product to well-
organised networked
campaigns.2
4
Just another
thing to worry
about?
5
2 Martin Lindstrom, Brandchild, Kogan Page, 2003
3 Food Commission, Broadcasting Bad Health: Why food
marketing to children needs to be controlled, 2003
4 quoted in the Guardian, November 17, 2002
5 International Council of Toy Industry, British Association of Toy Retailers
6 quoted in the Guardian November 6, 2002

6
7
The NFPI asked parents about their
views on marketing and advertising
to children, but they also told us a
lot about how they feel society has
changed, and how that relates to their
own children’s choices. Many parents
looked back at their own childhoods
and rightly or wrongly saw them as less
stressful, less pressured times. They
remembered far more play outside, with
less social life and activity focussed
within the home.
“I think that in a lot of ways television
advertising, that must have killed a
lot of kids. When I was a kid the
main problem with me was, where
was I? I was up trees, I was
conkering, I was swimming over the
brook, fishing, whatever. You can’t
get them out of the house now. The
worst thing my mother could say to
me was “Go to your room.” Whereas
now the kids come home from school
and ‘whoosh.’ We’ve got, I don’t
know how many televisions in our
house. They’ve all got one in their
bedrooms.”
“Life is different now”
“The thing that most annoys me
about advertising at children is the
way at this time of year it increases,
and I can guarantee that my seven
year-old is convinced that she
cannot do without this product she
has just seen advertised.”
Parents think that there is more
marketing directed at their children
than when they were children. They all
remember adverts from their childhood
– “don’t forget the fruit gums, mum!” –
but they all believe there is far more
marketing through many different
means. Their belief is conﬁrmed by this
remark from a marketing man:
“Imagine a child sitting in the
middle of a large circle of train
tracks. Tracks, like the tentacles of
an octopus, radiate to the child
from the outside circle of tracks.
The child can be reached from every
angle. This is how the corporate
marketing world is connected to the
child’s world.” 14
Parents spoke of the following different
forms of marketing:
Television advertising
Advertising on the TV was the most
frequently mentioned. Parents not
only thought there were more adverts,
but that the bombardment happened
all year round, rather than at peak
selling times like Christmas. Weekend
morning programming was thought to
be particularly heavy and concentrated,
as was after-school programming. They
disliked the frequent repetition of
adverts. They were critical of some
adverts for toys and games: they felt
that adverts often fudged the line
between reality and fantasy and implied
that the toys were bigger than they were.
They felt that only expensive toys were
marketed, and they disliked what they
saw as a growth in the idea of sets or
series of toys which had to be collected,
which encouraged multiple purchase.
“The thing that most annoys me
– “don’t forget the fruit gums, mum!” –
“Imagine a child sitting in the
The proportion of children
judged overweight has increased
sevenfold in 30 years to 30%.
Seven out of ten school leavers
abandon physical activity.
More than 60% of children
regularly eat crisps after
school, 40% eat biscuits and
37% eat chocolate. Sales are
predicted to rise by 20% in the
next four years.11
Research from the Children’s
Society and the Children’s Play
Council12
asked more than 2,500
children what stopped them
playing outside. Their answers
included being told off by
adults, and even threatened for
activities such as riding a bike in
the street. Adults are becoming
increasingly intolerant. A MORI
survey found that 75% of the
adult population supported
a legally enforceable evening
curfew on teenagers.13
More money
Children have more disposable
income – pocket money is
increasing. 9-10 year olds get
£3.65 a week; 11-14 year olds
typically receive £6 or £7 a week
and 15-16 year olds get almost £13.
Annual spending power was
about £2.7 billion in 2002.
What do parents think about
marketing to children?
Staying in
A 2002 survey by the ITC
(Independent Television
Commission) revealed that on
average each household has
three televisions.
More than 75% of 5-16 years
olds have their own TV; 50% have
their own video and 75% own a
mobile phone.7
A third of children under 3 have a
TV set in their room.8
On average children between four and
15 spend two hours and 23 minutes
a day watching TV (Broadcasting
Standards commission).
95% of advertising during
children’s TV programmes was for
fatty, salty or sugary foods.9
Most children according to the
BSC and the ITC keep the TV on
while doing homework.
The volume of children’s and young
people’s television provision has
grown, rising from just over four
hours a week in 1952 to over 620
hours in 2002. This growth is partly
because there are many more
channels. Many non-terrestrial
broadcasters broadcast content
for young people after the 9pm
watershed, but parents still value
the watershed.10
In a survey carried out by Powergen
during the 2003 summer holidays,
seven out of 10 children spend
more time playing on computers
and watching TV than any other
hobby. 25% of parents said their
children spent seven hours or more
a day in this way.
Out and about
In the early seventies, seven out of
ten seven year-olds made their own
way to school. Today less than one
in ten does. 39% of primary aged
children went to school by car (an
increase of 11% over 15 years).
Only about 2% of trips to school
by secondary age children were
by bike.
The British Heart Foundation says a
third of under-sevens fail to reach
the minimum recommended activity
levels – and by 15, two thirds of
girls are classiﬁed inactive.
The changing lives of children and young people
11 Mintel, Children’s eating habits, 2003
12 Research released by the Children’s Society for Playday 2003
13 Ken Worpole, No particular place to go? Children, young people and public space, Groundwork, 2003
14 quoted in a speech by Gary Ruskin, Director of Commercial Alert, April 17, 2002
7 Childwise, Children and advertising, 2003
8 Early Learning Centre poll conducted by NOP, quoted in the Daily Telegraph, September 3, 2003
9 Sustain
10 They have been watching 1952-2002…, Jamie Cowling and Kirstie Lee, IPPR, 2003

companies which were finding their way
into schools.
“As parents and primary school
teachers, we are aware of an
insidious way of targeting children.
These schemes in which children/
parents are encouraged to collect
vouchers or tokens which schools
can then exchange for equipment
are very worrying. Tesco vouchers
for computers and Walkers crisps
tokens spring to mind. Schools
which collect these tokens do so
very lightly without considering the
implications. By accepting the tokens
schools ‘officialise’ and condone the
purchases made.”
Starting early
“Research shows that children
from as young as 18 months are
able to recognise corporate labels.
About a year later they are able to
associate items in their world with
specific brand names. For example,
when they think about juice, they
don’t think just juice, they think
company.”15
Parents were well aware that their
young children were being targeted
by companies. In a discussion about
McDonalds marketing strategy, one
parent said: “(They market) from
four, aged four. They get the Happy
Meals and the toys... my son’s first
words weren’t Mummy or Daddy,
they were ‘go gogga’ and that meant
McDonalds. He could see this big M
and he recognised it as McDonalds.”
While that may be a marketing man’s
dream, many parents were very
concerned at the effect marketing had
on such young children. “I think they
aim (TV advertising) at the little ones.
You try to explain to a four or five
year-old that it’s not actually
like that.”
Can children as young as four or five
understand adverts? The research on
this issue is contested; however in
research commissioned by the ITC,16
Young suggested that by about five
or six a child may have the rudiments
of advertising literacy on the most
simple level. However, it is not until
the child is older that he or she has an
understanding of the intentions behind
marketing. There is also a question of
whether an ‘adequate’ understanding is
good enough, even for older children.
“Every time there’s an advert for toys
he will say ‘I want that toy, can you
buy me that toy?’ He’s got so much
into the habit now that when we
come home he asks what we bought
him today.”
In 2000/2 the Tweenies franchise alone
earned the BBC £32 million. Tweenies
merchandise is everywhere, and the BBC
has linked up with both McDonalds and
Burger King, with Tweenies characters
used to promote burgers, sweets and
other foods high in salt, sugar and fat.
Cinema
Many were irritated at cinema spin-offs.
“It’s connected with films now isn’t it?
No matter where you go, promoted
everywhere, in the supermarkets
there’s always something there
connected with a film. So then that
dictates what they want. It’s what
promotion is running in conjunction
with a new film. I think that seems to
be the biggest thing because
that will be then carried through
into McDonalds, through into
Woolworths, whatever.”
Product tie-ins
Parents particularly mentioned
‘superbrands’, including the BBC show
Tweenies, ScoobyDoo and Bob the
Builder. Children notice products
displaying well-known characters and
want their parents to buy those, rather
than the unbranded variety.
“It’s the spaghetti that gets me
– Barbie spaghetti.”
“If I buy a packet of Penguins, normal
Penguins, they won’t touch them. If I
buy a packet of Penguins with Bart
Simpson on them, they’ll eat them
because they like Bart Simpson.”
“You walk into Woolworths and they
have got pencil cases, they’ve got
books, they’ve got everything.
They do it because they know what
children are like. I don’t think it
should be put on the shelves
so easily.”
Parents did not like collectable in-box
toys, save-up vouchers that encouraged
children to ask their parents to buy
more, particularly as they were often
associated with sweet cereals.
Internet
“My kids want to go on the internet
and every time something flashes up
and an advert comes up all the time,
it keeps coming up.”
Parents were aware that internet and
mobile phone advertising were reaching
their children, but feel very uninformed
about it.
Marketing through new technology
is likely to increase rapidly. Some
potential issues for parents arising from
online marketing could include:
Invasion of children’s privacy
through collecting data from
children by the use of prizes and
games to find out children’s email
addresses
Unsolicited email sent to children
Unclear distinction between
content and advertising in
‘branded environments’
Use of ‘product spokescharacters’
who interact directly with the child
Hyperlinks in children’s games and
play area which directly transport
the child to advertising sites.
A more pro-active approach must be
taken to regulate online marketing, for
example, advertisers should not be
allowed to acquire personal information
from children, and advertising should
be clearly differentiated.
School based activities
Parents were not happy about the
encroachment of marketing into schools.
They particularly mentioned vending
machines and posters for fast food
8
9
15 Martin Lindstrom
16 The child’s understanding of the intent behind advertising, an update to 2002,. Brian M Young March 2002

“
”
The cereal packs to collect this,
or the cards, it’s all about
having it. And then once
they’ve got it, I don’t know
about everybody else but
they don’t want it. He’s much
happier with a ball in
the garden.
Parents felt differently about marketing
depending on what was being advertised.
They strongly felt, however, that
marketing engages children and helps
shape their attitudes not just to specific
brands and products but to the world
around them. This was not seen by
parents as a positive effect.
Children have lost the ability to
please themselves, to be
creative, resourceful, self-reliant,
the net effect of protective
parents and the surge of child-
oriented products.
Children are, or are at risk of being,
spoilt, having things ‘too easy,’
unable to defer gratification, or
cope with going without; they
engage in a process of attrition
where repetition of demand can
eventually lead to the parent
giving way.
Children, perhaps especially
between 6-14, are very receptive
to celebrity endorsement, to
brands and to product tie-ins.
They are at risk of developing a
‘throwaway’ attitude, encouraged
to adopt the latest brand/product
as it becomes available.
Older children’s
demands tend to be less
public than younger children’s
tantrums, but are usually directed
at much higher value goods, like
mobile phones, computer
software, televisions.
While they may be more ‘savvy’
about marketing techniques, they
are still children, and can be
misled and disappointed.
Parents do not want their children
to feel isolated by not having what
other children have – peer pressure
and marketing work as powerfully
on parents as on their kids.
Parents also expressed concerns
about clothes for children
(especially for girls) which are seen
as too skimpy and sexualised for
their age.
Does marketing influence
family decisions?
“When you’re food shopping and
you’ve got kids with you, you end
up piling all sorts in your shopping
trolley. I mean, you do it for a quiet
life, but because they’ve seen it on
TV they think it’s the best.”
“I have lost count of the number
of tantrums I have had in Asda
because I won’t let the girls have
cereal just for the free gift.”
Parents admitted that they often
felt under pressure to buy for their
children. Although many of them said
that they resisted that pressure, they
said that it often led to confrontation
and arguments. Even if parents feel
that they do a reasonable job resisting
children’s pressure, it may be that
they underestimate the extent of
children’s influence, and the extent of
the effort by the marketing industry to
get children to influence their parents.
The industry has absolutely no doubt
that children and can increasingly do
exercise enormous power over their
family’s decision making.
“Children are often the key decision
makers concerning where a family
goes to eat. That means you should
do everything you can to appeal to
children’s love for McDonalds” (from an
internal McDonalds staff manual, cited
in the 1997 ‘McLibel’ trial summing up
by Justice Bell). The judge from the
McLibel trial came to the conclusion
that McDonalds did directly market
to children in order to get them to
put pressure on their parents to go to
McDonalds, and did so because children
are more susceptible to advertising.
“They walk along the shelves
and see something they
know, Bart Simpson or Nemo
and say ‘I want those’, at
a certain age, four or five.
They say ‘I want that’. They
don’t know what’s in it. Lots
of times and you get home
and it’s ‘Can I have, can I
have...’ whatever character it
is. You open it up and they
don’t like it. They purely
wanted it for the picture.”
Some recent research17
looked at
parents’ views on children’s decision
making power. It concludes that even
very young children have some decision-
making power.
Less than one in three parents
claimed they give their children no
say in decisions about food, leisure
activities and gifts they receive
About 40% of parents don’t allow
their children a say in what clothes
they wear
The level of decision making power
increases as the child gets older
but only 15% of teenagers are
always allowed to chose what they
eat or the gifts they receive
There is more influence over what
they wear than what they eat.
The study goes on to comment that it is
a sign of a healthier, more democratic
family life that children’s wishes are
listened to, and that teenagers in
particular appreciate the growing
freedom. But the same freedom
and more open family life can bring
unforeseen consequences. In marketing
terms, a child whose wishes are listened
to represents a marketing opportunity.
Whilst parents may be happy to allow
children a significant say in matters that
directly affect them, like their clothes
and food, what about marketing adult
products to children?
The effects of marketing on children
10
11
17 Future Foundations Vision, reported in Marketing Week, September 25, 2003

“
”
The hype is to have
more and more and
more and more. The
hype is, the more
you have the better
you are.
Marketing adult products
to children
“My eight year-old – he was only six
and a half — and I was doing the
shopping and he was saying ‘Mum,
you’ve got to get Bounty kitchen
towels, you’ve got to get them.’
I said ‘I don’t want to get those,
they’re twice as expensive.’ ‘But on
television they wipe up everything,
they don’t tear.’ He was telling me
things that were aimed at me. He
was picking up and thinking ‘These
kitchen towels are great, you’ve got
to get them.’
“Securing youth appeal not
only established brand loyalty
at an early age, but has a
dramatic influence on parents’
purchasing patterns.”
Martin Lindstrom
In his book, Lindstrom describes how
children increasingly influence decisions
about major purchases. He suggests
that urban tweens influence 60 per
cent of all car purchases made by their
parents, and 45 per cent of mobile
phone purchases. Because of their
importance to the market, companies
are increasingly targeting young people
to sell adult products, whilst still
trying to appeal to the adult market.
Companies are using, for example,
celebrity endorsements to give a
product a ‘cool’ image (42 per cent of all
boys think it’s really cool to see a sports
star in a commercial).18
Lindstrom
argues that tweens in particular ‘bond’
with adult brands, based on whether
the brand is trendy and accepted by
the peer group, but the main source
of information about adult brands is
still television. “Our data highlights the
commanding influence that television has
over tweens’ view of the world. No other
medium comes close to having the same
reach among tweens.”
What’s really being
marketed?
“The advertising shows you a little
boy and his mum has given him this
Dairylea slice and he’s saying how
good his mum was, and then this
other poor boy only had sandwiches.
So his mum was really cruel,
you know, and that’s the wrong
impression. That your mum’s really
cool if she buys you this crappy
cheese, plastic cheese.”
“I sometimes think we give in to the
pressure because you don’t want
your child to be the odd one out.”
Here’s
what one
marketing
man thinks
it’s all about…
“Dreams are the hard
currency in the life
of a tween. Every brand
and every product has
to appeal to the
imagination of
tweens. It has to
give them something
to dream about.”19
And one academic wrote in a similar
vein. Dr Aric Sigman, a psychologist,
details how adverts directed at children
are designed to address and exploit
children’s basic needs.20
He identifies
four vulnerabilities: the need for
nurture and protection; the need for
stimulation; the need for role models;
and the need for peer group acceptance.
Another advertising executive put it
this way…
“Advertising at its best is making people
feel that without their product, you’re a
loser. Kids are very sensitive to that. If
you tell them to buy something, they
are resistant, but if you tell them that
they’ll be a dork if they don’t you’ve got
their attention. You open up emotional
vulnerability, and it’s very easy to do with
kids because they’re the most emotionally
vulnerable.”21
What’s really being marketed is a
picture, a dream, a construction of
identity. And alongside that is being
created a brand-aware consumer,
looking to find belonging and
acceptance through the marketplace.
There is no easy or straightforward
answer because as yet there is no
agreement on the problem. On the
one hand, there is an increasing body
of opinion worried about the effects
of the multi-million pound spend on
persuading and influencing children,
and on creating brand loyalty from an
ever earlier age. These organisations,
like the Food Commission or the US
Commercial Alert argue that the size
and economic strength of the industry
needs more control if it is to be
persuaded to look at the social good as
well as selling its products.
On the other hand, the industry argues
that children are more media-savvy
than ever before, that they need to
learn how to understand and analyse
marketing and advertising to help them
cope as they grow up. The industry
has funded a group called Media
Smart which provides worksheets and
material for schools to run classes on
understanding advertising from primary
school up. But should valuable lesson
time be spent teaching our children how
to become sophisticated consumers?
12
What should be done about
marketing to children?
13
18 quoted from Martin Lindstrom, p.254
19 Martin Lindstrom
20 quoted in Blackmail – the first in a series of inquiries
into consumer concerns about the ethics of food
production and advertising, CWS ltd. 2000
21 quoted in “It’s time to protect children from the
advertisers”, Child Poverty Action Group 2002

“
”
You sound like a dragon to your
children. You’re constantly putting
down everything they’ve just been
told is wonderful. I’m constantly
negative about these
things – ‘it’s not as good
as that, it’s rubbish, it’s
cheap, it’s nasty.’ They
made it out to be some
wonderful item.
15
Media Smart quote research that “shows
that parents have the greatest influence
on young children’s development and
behaviour, and your media exposure
determines their media habits.” Media
Smart offers tips for parents in
controlling their children’s viewing, and
in so doing is reinforcing the idea that
it’s all down to parents.
The NFPI asked parents if they thought
that it was their responsibility – solely
and/or primarily – to control their
children’s viewing.
Is it down to parents to
control children’s exposure
to marketing?
“I feel like I have to keep saying no
because obviously with two children,
not working, and I just haven’t got
the money. And they want this and
I’m forever going ‘No, no, no, no’ and
what the kids must think of me – ‘Oh
I hate Mum, she never buys
me anything.’ It does get really
upsetting sometimes.”
“Parents do say no. They say no, you
can’t stay up late. No, you can’t eat
pudding before your main course.
No, you can’t have
a dog. Setting
boundaries is
what parents
do. It’s tough
sometimes... and
I need to ask if the
advertising industry
are comfortable spending
millions of pounds targeting
children direct and then
saying it’s down to mum
and dad to stand up
to them?”
In our discussion groups, parents
agreed that they do have a significant
role in mediating between children
and marketing, and on the whole, felt
they were doing a good job. However,
they talked of feeling overwhelmed
at the scale and extent of marketing,
and therefore of the task. Parents
saw their role as dealing with the
consequences of children’s exposure
to marketing rather than prohibiting
children watching television, going on
the internet, using their mobile phone
and so on. They felt that the policing
role came at a price, and that they
felt themselves put in the position of
always having to say no, of being the
spoilsport or kill-joy.
Parents mentioned different strategies:
Reasoning about specific requests,
trying to clarify exactly why the
child wanted the item
Having agreed budgets for items
like clothes and presents
Asking for a matched contribution
from the child for expensive items
Doing deals – getting more of a
cheaper alternative, for example,
several T-shirts for the cost of one
branded T-shirt
Negotiated limits on time spent
watching television
Children not taken on shopping
trips, or only allowed one choice
from the supermarket
Avoidance tactics – delaying,
postponing a decision.
Parents said that the rules in the house
were often influenced by pressure from
the child, available cash, a desire for a
quiet life, and that the rules were often
applied inconsistently. It is likely from
the responses that parents operated a
fluid system, but understandably they
were not keen to be self-critical.
Expecting parents to bear the
main burden of gatekeeping in an
environment where the full creative
and economic might of the marketing
world is put to persuading children
to buy seems unfair, unworkable and
detrimental to both the children’s and
parents’ best interests. Family life
has to deal with many pressures but
these are pressures which parents say
are outside their control, yet have a
profound impact within their family.
Should marketing to
children be banned or
regulated?
“I would say there should be a
restriction especially as regards food,
because a lot of the things that are
marketed at children are packed full
of additives, salt and sugar.”
“They’ll (marketing agencies) find
another way, they’ll do it through the
internet or mobile phones.”
Parents were uncertain about what
could be done to regulate or control
the industry, and felt that no matter
what was done, the industry would find
a way round it. That feeling echoes a
consistent sense of helplessness in the
face of such a huge phenomenon. It
also reflects the way in which parents
themselves accepted marketing and
adverts as just part of their lives,
sometimes useful, sometimes annoying.
Parents were reluctant to be drawn on
whether they felt there were any more
long-term effects of marketing to
children; just occasionally there was a
glimpse that marketing messages might
be put to better use.
“I’m not sure there should be no
advertising at all, but it is difficult,
but I feel that it is too hyped. I feel
that the country, the community, I
don’t know, has a duty to sometimes
portray a different message which is,
you know, what it’s all about rather
than having another car with a
computer on it, or whatever it is.”
Despite feeling that advertising “is
there and always will be,” parents
grappled with ideas on whether and how
the industry should be more controlled.
There was no clear consensus from the
discussions; parents were uncertain
whether control should be exercised
‘top-down’ or ‘bottom-up.’ They did
not believe that control would be easy
to define and enforce – marketing
ingenuity would find alternative,
possible less overt routes to the same
end. There was a sense that marketing
had infiltrated so many areas of their
family’s life that a control in just one
area would do very little.
14

What do other countries do?
Many other European countries have taken action to protect
children from excessive marketing and advertising. France,
Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK have no legal
bans in place.
Austria – No advertising during children’s programmes.
Belgium – No advertising is allowed five minutes
before or after programmes for children under 12
(in Flemish areas).
Denmark – No advertising breaks during programmes.
Greece – No advertising of toys between 7am and 10pm.
A total ban on advertising of war toys.
Sweden – No advertising to children under 12.
No adverts broadcast during or
immediately before or after
children’s programmes.
16
17
Some tentative support emerged for
some specifically and carefully directed
controls:
Controls by subject area:
controls or a ban on child-
oriented promotion of snack and
convenience foods.
Controls by time of day: there was
support for limiting the amount
of advertising in key periods,
particularly Saturday morning and
after school.
Controls by volume: parents
favoured a control of the number
of showings of any particular
advert or campaign.
Controls by creative content:
parents wanted more stringent
controls used when demonstrating
particular products, for example,
action toys to avoid disappointing
or misleading children.
How advertising is regulated
in the UK
It was interesting that parents showed
no knowledge of existing rules and
codes governing advertising.
Up until very recently, the control of
advertising on television was the
responsibility of the Independent
Television Commission who drew up
codes of practice governing adverts,
with the power to impose fines for
breaking the rules. Individual adverts
for television have to be cleared in
advance by the Broadcast Advertising
Clearance Centre. There are specific
rules about advertising to children,
including:
Adverts for toys over £25 must
show the price.
There are restrictions on adverts
that ‘might result in harm to
children physically, mentally or
morally’ and on adverts that might
‘take advantage of the natural
credulity and sense of loyalty
of children’.
Adverts cannot ‘exhort children
to purchase or ask their parents
or others to make enquiries
or purchases’.
Adverts must not arouse unrealistic
expectations.
Adverts must not imply that
children will be inferior to
others, disloyal or will have let
someone down it they do not buy a
particular product.
Adverts must not contain material
which could lead to social, moral,
physical or psychological harm.
If people are unhappy about a particular
advert, they could write to complain to
the ITC.
From January 2004, there is a new
system of regulating most forms of
media by one single body. Ofcom (Office
of Communications) has been set up by
Government to be a ‘super-regulator’,
taking over from the Independent
Television Commission, the Radio
Authority, Oftel (for telecommunications)
Radio Communications Agency and
Broadcasting Standards Commission.
The ASA (Advertising Standards
Authority), which deals with all print
regulation, remains.
Ofcom will be a ‘light-touch’ regulator,
that is, it will reflect the Government’s
view that the industry needs less
regulation. As far as controls and
regulation on advertising is concerned,
the picture is still unclear, but it is
likely that all current codes will be
reviewed over the coming year. There
is a proposal to contract out regulation
of advertising on TV and radio to the
Advertising Standards Authority, which
runs a system of self-regulation.
Is the current system
good enough?
Critics argue that self-regulation is
not tough enough – at present, the
ITC has the power to crack down or
ban offending adverts, but the new
system will rely on self-regulation.
Advertisers and marketers are
continually pushing at the
boundaries and have little interest
in a wider view of children’s
welfare or the social good.
The current system has
offered little
encouragement
to people to
complain or
have their voice
heard. Although
there is a complaints
system, it is not widely
used, perhaps because
of the perception that few
complaints are upheld. The
ITC and ASA have not
promoted themselves as
upholders of individual
citizens and advocates
for their interests to
the industry. It is difficult to
know how much influence users
and consumers will have on Ofcom.
The current system does not look at
the overall amount or cumulative
effect of adverts. It will only
examine an individual advert, not
its context or frequency or long
term effect. Ofcom will only look
at adverts in the broadcast media,
including the internet. There is an
urgent need for an organisation
that will look in a more over-
arching way at the combined
effects of marketing to children
– advertising, product placement,
celebrity endorsement, product tie-
ins and marketing to schools.
Whatever happens to the structure,
it is likely that parents will not
feel reassured that there will be a
robust and pro-active approach to
marketing to children.
Voices of concern
The EU Consumers Committee has
called for horizontal EU legislation
to cover all forms of marketing
practices covering all products
and services.
The World Health Organisation
has called for more stringent codes
of practice.

18
19
The International Obesity Task Force
has called for an advertising ban on
inappropriate food and drinks.
The chief Medical Officer has called
for the use of the ‘precautionary
principle’ in relation to food
advertising, which is defined as
“when an activity raises threats
of harm to human health or the
environment, precautionary
measure should be taken
even if some cause and effect
relationships are not fully
established scientifically.”
And the Government?
Tessa Jowell, Minister with responsibility
for advertising, has asked Ofcom to
review its code on advertising food to
children, but has ruled out banning food
adverts on television. The Government
believes that less, not more, regulation
is desirable and has no policy on
marketing to children generally.
Kraft Foods announced in October 2003
that it would ‘strengthen the alignment
of our products and marketing with
societal needs’. In plain words, that
means that Kraft are responding to
consumer concerns (and hope it will
reduce the chance of the company
being sued for contributing to obesity).
Kraft have announced that they will
reduce salt, fat and sugar levels in
their products. Kraft make Dairylea
Lunchables, described by some parents
in our survey as “one of the most
processed, unhealthy things you
could possibly give your child.”
McDonalds have announced that some
Happy Meals for children in some
McDonalds outlets will offer fruit
rather than fries. McDonalds are also
expanding their range of foods to offer
salads. This Christmas (2003) for the
first time Mcdonalds-branded toys are
being sold in toy shops. The toys are
aimed at very young children – getting
brand loyalty early.
Asda has announced that it will put
fresh fruit instead of confectionary at
the checkouts in all its stores. The
company said only 3 out of 20 checkouts
will offer fruit initially because
customers are “used to buying sweets.”
In November 2003, Coca Cola announced
an end to advertising their drinks to
children under 12. From January 2004,
Coca Cola will be the official sponsor to
the UK Singles and Albums Chart, with
a weekly audience of 16 million, many
under 12. As Coca Cola’s branding will
be used when the charts are publicised,
Coca Cola branding is likely to appear on
BBC’s Top of the Pops.
GlaxoSmithKline have had to withdraw
a specially written Mr Men children’s
book promoting its anti-allergy
products because it had broken the
rule that advertising medicines is not
allowed in products directly targeted
at children.
Proctor & Gamble recently launched a
new toilet paper – Charmin – with a
picture of a cute cuddly bear on the
packaging. The company has now
produced a million copies of The
Adventures of Charmin the Bear, a 32 page
book aimed at 2-4 year olds, on sale in
bookshops. Executives admitted that
the publication of the book was designed
to bolster the image of its brand.
Cadbury Get Active campaign offered
to invest £9million in sports equipment
for schools via tokens on chocolate
wrappers at a time when almost one
in five children is overweight. Children
would have had to eat 5,440 bars of
chocolate to collect enough tokens to
get a volleyball kit. The campaign has
now ended.
Walkers crisps have been running a
hugely successful campaign with
Gary Lineker endorsement. The result?
When vending machines arrived in
schools, 93 per cent of 15-16 year olds
rank the brand as their highest “top of
mind” snack.
Heinz has announced that it will
stop adverts directed solely at pre-
school children. But it will continue
to use pictures of TV characters on
its packaging.
One advertsing agency recently
apologised to a House of Commons
Select Committee for encouraging
pester power. In a private media
brief for Walkers Crisps, the agency’s
proposed script said “I am going to
pester mum for them (Wotsits) when
she next goes shopping.” Abbott
Mead Vickers said “the wording was
unfortunate and we won’t do it again.”
“Brands have become an integral
part of the way tweens define
themselves. Tweens are the most
brand-conscious generation yet.
It is largely through their choice
of brands that tweens distinguish
themselves from one another.”
Brandchild, Martin Lindstrom,
“one of the world’s primary
branding gurus.” Kogan Page, 2003
Spotlight on companies

There is a lot of debate about marketing
food to children, and the parents
in our survey had strong views. The
debate contains all the ingredients of
the larger picture: large corporations,
hands-off regulation, pressure from
health and consumer groups, celebrity
endorsement — and caught in the
middle — parents trying to decide to do
what’s best for their kids.
“We’re the parents. We should
be in control of what our kids eat.
They’re aimed at the kids aren’t they,
and they’re going to get the kids
whingeing – I want this, I want this.’
We should be in control of what our
kids eat.”
Concerns over marketing
junk food to children
A recent report by the Food Commission
shows that:
For every $1 dollar spent globally
by the World Health Organisation
on preventing obesity and related
illnesses, the global food industry
spent $500 promoting fatty foods.
Food advertising accounted for
about 50% of all advertising in
children’s programmes in UK, and
of that amount, around 75% was
for fast or convenience food.
The Food Standards Agency’s recent
research22
concluded that food
advertised to children is less healthy
than the recommended diet and food
promotion is having an effect,
particularly on children’s food preferences,
purchase behaviour and consumption.
The Consumers Association voiced
criticisms of the high levels of fat, sugar
and salt in foods specifically targeted
at children, using cartoon characters on
their packaging.
Arguments advanced
by the industry against
further controls
The industry argue that food is not
the key reason so many children
are overweight and unfit, and that
far more needs to be done to get
children exercising.
They argue that a ban on food
advertising would reduce the
money available to make children’s
programmes on TV, and that the
quality would suffer as a result.
The industry already adhere to a
strict code of practice.
It’s up to parents to monitor
and control their children’s
eating habits.
In any case, children are not
gullible; they understand what’s
being advertised.
Advertising helps children make
sense of the world.
Public opinion can make
a difference
Public opinion is swinging round in
this country towards greater control.
A recent poll for the Guardian by ICM
found that nearly 70 per cent of adults
favoured banning crisps, chocolate
and fizzy drink vending machines from
schools; 57 per cent wanted food
advertising banned during children’s TV.
Debra Shipley MP has introduced a Bill
to ban advertising during pre-school
children’s TV that features food and
drink high in fat, salt and sugar.
Whilst the Government has not made a
commitment to introducing legislation
to tackle the marketing of unhealthy
food, the growing swell of opinion and
concern will become harder to ignore.
Marketing to Children
Report of the conference held on November 25, 2003
20
The current debate: marketing food to children
Opening Remarks 22
Mary MacLeod, Chief Executive, NFPI
The Parent’s Perspective on Marketing
to Children: The Issues 22
Vicky Shotbolt, Head of Communications, NFPI
The Parent’s Perspective on Marketing
to Children: The Research 23
Gill Keep, Project Manager, NFPI
Review of Research on the Effects
of Food Promotion to Children 23
Professor Gerard Hastings, Director of
Centre for Social Marketing and Research
and Centre for Tobacco Control Research,
University of Strathclyde
Questions and Panel Answers 25
Study of Children and Fashion
Consumption 25
Dr Christopher Pole, Senior Lecturer in
Sociology, University of Leicester
Food Standards Authority 26
Rosemary Hignett, Head, Food Labelling
Division, Food Standards Authority
Advertising Standards Authority 27
Guy Parker, Director, Advertising Practice,
Advertising Standards Authority
The Independent Television Commission 28
Ian Blair, Deputy Director, Programmes
and Advertising Group, Independent
Television Commission
Panel Discussion: The Way Forward,
Choices and Challenges 30
Mary MacLeod
Advertising Association 30
Jeremy Preston, Director, Food Advertising Unit,
Advertising Association
The National Consumer Council 31
Ed Mayo, Chief Executive, The National
Consumer Council
Media Smart 31
Paul Jackson, Chairman, Media Smart
Good Business 32
Steve Hilton, Director, Good Business
Questions and Answers 32
Contents
21
Marketing to Children Conference Report
22 Review of research on the effects of food promotion to children, Gerard Hastings, University of Strathclyde, September 2003

Mary MacLeod
Chief Executive, NFPI
The National Family and Parenting
Institute was set up four years ago to
make families matter in public policy, to
draw attention to difficulties families
face in raising children; and to work
to overcome them. We do this through
research, policy, public information and
campaigning. We hold events, seminars
and conferences to raise and debate
questions from the perspective of parents.
Parents have very little voice in policy
- even the school term dates are changed
without reference to them. There is an
overriding sense that others know best
- and this is not just government, but
industry, professional service providers,
and opinion formers in the media. Parents
are raising children within an atmosphere
of blame and pervading anxiety about
whether they are doing it well enough,
while they are unable to control all the
forces that impact on their and their
children’s lives. We want to highlight
that contradiction.
Many of the issues we examine at NFPI,
like marketing to children, are deeply
contested between organisations and
people with specific interests. We aim to
get people together across divides to hear
each other’s viewpoint and the evidence
in a search for solutions.
This seminar is especially timely, given
the way the marketing of ‘junk food’ has
risen up the public agenda. This seminar
has a wider focus. We are convinced that
segmenting the broad issue of marketing
to children into bite-size bits, while
it allows concentration, loses grasp of
scale, volume and range of marketing
that children are exposed to. Parents and
children do not lead their lives in these
separate arenas. Nor do we want to add to
the apocalyptic atmosphere about modern
family life that is often associated with
discussions about technology, marketing
and the family.
We do not expect to reach a consensus at
the end of this seminar. But we do hope to
achieve three things:
l To increase understanding among
participants of each other’s positions
l To raise awareness of the ordinary
parent’s experience
l To debate the pros and cons of
different approaches to lay the ground
for policy.
Vicky Shotbolt
Head of Communications, NFPI
1. Introduction
Marketing has a wide impact on children’s
daily life. Parents are subject to a wide
range of opinion from various bodies as
to what constitutes good parenting and
are often not praised for raising the next
generation, but blamed when things go
wrong. The media are very critical of
parents. Doing the best by children in a
society that places so many difficulties in
the way of parents is problematic. This is
the reason for the NFPI’s Family Friendly
campaign that began last October.
2. Family Friendly Campaign
The aim of the campaign was to find out
what parents’ worries and concerns are,
and how these could be improved. One
question was included about marketing,
which was ‘do you think that companies
target your children too much with goods?’
84 per cent of parents agreed. This was
the largest response in the entire report.
Some of the main issues raised included
the increase in advertising aimed at
children before the festive period; children
wanting products solely for a free gift; and
children being conned into buying goods.
3. Marketing Techniques
Marketers use various strategies to enter
the family space so that they can directly
influence children. There is a five-point
plan that is used in targeting children:
l Integrating channels. For adults there
are three channels: online, offline and
wireless. Children cannot differentiate
between channels, so all bases need
be covered.
l Integrate the message across
channels.
l Make sure it is legal.
l 24/7 brands.
l Think multidimensional. The channels
should work together for a viral effect.
Marketing people are employed to focus
specifically on children. As such, these
marketers are required to understand
children’s purchasing instincts and
in some cases job adverts specify an
understanding of pester power.
4. The Arguments
Adverts are often intended to target
preschool-aged children and can include
scripts for children to use to pester their
parents. Parents are also manipulated
into buying products through gifts or
donations to a school. Marketers believe
that this type of activity switches
brand loyalties and does not change
consumption. However, this does not hold
when taken in the light of new products,
such as alcopops, that are created
specifically for children. Additionally,
when looking at the various products
available in a supermarket, one could be
inclined to believe that children require
food designed specifically for them.
Much of the marketing debate has focused
on food, for which the proposed solution
has been regular exercise. This has been
proved to be insufficient. Nobody believes
anymore that it is right for advertisers
to promote unhealthy foods so that
they become the diet, rather than an
occasional treat. The debate no longer
concerns just obesity, it is far more
complex and concerns the family, time,
budget and education.
It is also often argued that it is the
parent’s responsibility not to allow the
consumption of certain foods. However, in
reality parents set boundaries all the time
and the companies aim to stretch these
boundaries through vast advertising
budgets. These are not the actions of
responsible companies. However, some
companies do listen, such as Coca-Cola.
A further argument is that children should
be educated to be media savvy. However,
this is difficult for very young children
and one should question how much time
in a child’s education should have to be
devoted to media training.
Gill Keep
Project Manager, NFPI
1. Research Background
The NFPI carried out research to develop
policy recommendations related to
the issues outlined above. This was
instigated by the large response to
the marketing question in the Family
Friendly campaign. Further analysis
showed a consistency amongst the various
segments of society who responded in
this way. To explore the issues further,
the NFPI commissioned a market research
company to form discussion groups. They
met this month and the full report will be
published by Christmas. The discussions
were based around four questions.
2. Preliminary Findings to
Questions
1. What do parents think the influence is
of marketing in general, and specifically
TV advertising?
Initial indications find that parents are
overwhelmed by the scale and scope of
marketing activity. Parents admitted that
although they are aware of cross channel
marketing, they were not aware of the
consequences. Parents felt marketing
had risen in volume and were most aware
of television advertising. Hostile views
were expressed on food marketing and
marketing of new technology.
2. How and to what extent do they
think marketing influences family
decision-making?
Parents believe advertising affects
a child’s view on the world, but were
not acrimonious, although they were
concerned about the values and
expectations this may encourage.
3. To what extent do parents think it is
their responsibility to limit children’s
exposure to marketing?
All parents felt that they had
responsibility to mediate between
children and marketing.
4. Do parents think that marketing to
children should be controlled and
regulated?
All parents felt that parental control was
not sufficient and that a regulator was
necessary, although there was no
agreement of who should be responsible.
Suggested areas of advertising regulation
included volume, time of day and the product.
3. Discussion Comments
Issues highlighted during the discussions
groups included:
l Children constantly pestering
parents for toys that have just been
advertised on television to the extent
that they expect toys during every
shopping trip.
l Children advising parents on products
that are aimed at adults.
l The hype regarding materialism and
that the more you have, the better
person you are.
4. Aim of the Research
The aim of the research is to introduce
the parent’s view into the debate, the
responsibilities they feel and the daily
pressures they face.
Professor Gerard Hastings
Director of Centre for Social
Marketing and Research and
Centre for Tobacco Control
Research, University of
Strathclyde
1. Background
The Food Standards Agency (FSA)
commissioned research on the effects
of food promotion on children. This is a
literature review that looked at two issues.
The first was the extent and nature of
food promotion to children and, secondly,
the effects of this promotion. The main
reasoning behind the research was to
discover if the concerns voiced by parents
in this area had any scientific basis.
The review team included a broad range
of experienced academics from the
University of Strathclyde, the University
of Oxford, the University of York and
City University. Additionally, a scientific
advisory group was set up consisting of a
range of stakeholders.
2. Review Process
This was the first UK attempt to use
systematic review methods to examine
evidence on food promotion. This type
of research is very effective and is from
a scientific background that ensures
outcomes or decisions are as exact as
possible. It is comprehensive, rigorous,
transparent and replicable. The process
consisted of the following:
1. Accessing Data
This stage involved setting a wide enough
remit so that every possible study that
could be relevant is included. It involved
searching 11 databases of published
academic research, unpublished literature,
22
Opening Remarks
The Parent’s
perspective on
Marketing to Children:
The Issues
The Parent’s
Perspective on
Marketing to Children:
The Research
Review of Research
on the Effects of Food
Promotion to Children
23

24
personal contacts and reference chasing
articles. All the searches were referenced,
and quality and consistency checks were
made throughout.
2. Initial Sifting of Data
Over 30,000 articles and reports
were found, requiring a great deal of
referencing to reduce duplication. This
was whittled down to 201 articles that
passed initial reference criteria.
3. Final Selection and Analysis
The 201 articles were assessed
against more stringent relevance and
methodological quality criteria. This
reduced the number to 101, 50 of which
provided reasonably reliable evidence on
the extent and nature of food promotion
on children, and 51 that provided
evidence on children’s response to food
promotion and its effects.
3. Findings
1. What is the extent and nature of food
promotion?
Food dominates advertising to children,
with television being the principle
medium. Five product categories dominate
marketing: soft drinks, pre-sugared
cereals, confectionary, snacks and fast-
food restaurants. One of the most
significant findings was that the advertised
diet contrasts strongly with the
recommended diet.
2. What are the effects of food
promotion to children?
This question was broken down into the
following:
a. Does food promotion influence
children’s nutritional knowledge?
There is no evidence to suggest that
children watching advertisements have
a different perception on nutrition
than other children. What is apparent
is that advertising can enhance specific
knowledge of particular products.
b. Does food promotion influence
children’s preferences?
There is reasonably strong evidence
to support this. Children exposed to
food adverts are more likely to choose
advertised products than those who
are not.
c. Does food promotion influence
children’s food purchasing and
purchase-related behaviour?
There was strong and consistent evidence
finding that children exposed to food
promotion were influenced.
d. Does food promotion influence
children’s food consumption behaviour?
Some studies showed an influence,
although this was not as strong as the
evidence supporting an influence on
purchasing.
e. Does food promotion influence
children’s diet and health status?
This is a very difficult question to answer
as it requires a longitudinal study.
However, it was apparent that there
was a significant relationship between
television advertising and diet, obesity
and cholesterol. This does not implicate
advertising itself in this relationship, but
that of watching television. One study
found that greater exposure to food adverts
was related to higher calorie intake.
f. If food promotion has an effect, what is
the extent of this influence relative to
other factors?
This is the area with the weakest evidence
base as no studies could categorically
prove what the effect was relative to
other factors. The evidence does show,
however, that the effect of advertising is
independent of other influences.
g. Does food promotion affect total
category sales, brand-switching or both?
There is exactly the same evidence to
suggest that food promotion affects both
category and brand. Thus, there is no
reason to suggest that advertising affects
category and not brand choice.
4. Conclusions and
Recommendations
The research base is not fully
encompassing, so there is not a perfect
understanding of the issue, which would
not be possible anyhow. Furthermore, this
involves social science where there is no
such thing as certainty. However, it is
clear that the advertised diet contrasts
strongly with the recommended diet.
There is sufficient evidence to show that
food promotion affects children’s food
purchasing behaviour and preferences.
At the same time, evidence suggests
that advertising may be used to promote
healthy food, not just unhealthy.
The review carried out is likely to
understate the effects as it concentrated
on television advertising only and ignores
indirect effects.
Overall, it is clear that there is an effect.
This should be accepted so that the
argument can progress. There is a clear
need for a policy debate to respond to
this evidence. Future research should
focus on informing this debate.
5. Policy
It is already clear that in order to progress
marketing should be considered, as
opposed to advertising, and the lessons
from tobacco should be heeded. It should
be recognised that marketing is a dynamic
force and legislation is ponderous and ad
hoc. Thus, the response should reflect this
dynamism. It should also be borne in mind
that marketing can be used to encourage
better behaviour rather than worse.
Policy should incorporate the potential
to harness good practice. This is a
positive solution that moves beyond the
blame game. It recognises the vital role
of the food industry, enables the
concept of a shared vision and provides a
partnership environment.
In controlling bad practice, the guiding
principle should be that marketing
should not be used to encourage excess
consumption of high salt, sugar and fat
products. All food marketing should be
monitored and controlled and should
be consumer driven. Such a function
requires a statutory framework, longevity,
flexibility and long-term independent
funding. This body would need to work
within the existing structure and requires
a profile to reflect the seriousness of
the matter.
The benefits of such a body would
facilitate and encourage good practice,
allow the debate to move beyond blaming,
create a shared vision and provide a
strategic force. Furthermore, it would
enable the UK to take international
leadership on a very difficult problem.
Questions and Panel
Answers
Q Would it be possible to carry out a
study between the UK and another
country, such as Sweden where it
is not possible to advertise during
children’s television?
How old were the children in
the study?
A An international study would be
possible. One problem would be that it
would require a study from before the
ban and it would have to be ongoing.
Additionally, there are many factors
that make Sweden different from the UK.
The issue is that there is enough data
to act now rather than carry out more
studies that may simply delay action.
The age group was between two and 15.
Q What will be the reaction point in
the argument with industry?
A There should be no single event. It is
hoped that the stakeholders are able to
discuss an amicable solution together,
rather than through confrontation. The
statistics on obesity are most likely
to push this up the public agenda, as
occurred with smoking. For example, in
New York State, they have proved that
life expectancy has fallen as a result
of obesity. Once statistics are released,
pressure will focus on industry to make
it realise that it does not want to go
down the same litigious path
as tobacco.
Q It would be difficult to legislate
against advertising unhealthy
food. Could advertising be used to
promote healthy food to create a
competition for unhealthy food?
A If the advertised diet were the
recommended one and companies
began to promote healthy food, then
that would be a very favourable
outcome. One of the main problems is
materialism, which is far more difficult
to tackle.
Dr Christopher Pole
Senior Lecturer in Sociology,
University of Leicester
1. Background
This study is being carried out by the
University of Leicester and is funded by
the Economic and Social Research Council
(ESRC) and the Arts and Humanities
Research Board (AHRB). It forms part
of the research currently being carried
out into cultures of consumption. The
coordinator of the programme is Dr Frank
Trentmann, Birkbeck College. All of the
team are sociologists with different
specialities.
The focus of this research is on children as
active consumers of fashion, which is part
of two themes of the overall programme.
These are the penetration of consumption
into the domestic sphere and how people
use knowledge of products or services in
order to consume, with children expected
to use different knowledge than parents.
The reason for studying fashion is that it
is increasingly significant to children and
there is very little sociological research
on young children and fashion. This is
surprising since the clothing and accessories
market is worth £5 billion per year.
2. Key Research Questions
l What is the role of children as
independent agents in the process
of selection and purchasing of their
own clothing?
l What are children’s understandings
and interpretations of clothing
consumption in respect of their
own bodies? The body is integral to
clothing, so what does this mean
for children?
l How is the consumption of children’s
clothing mediated through
generational relations in the
household and through peer relations,
and how does this change over time?
For example, young girls wear clothes
deemed to be only suitable for older
ones. Central to this issue is the
way power is mediated through the
household.
l What understandings of the
consumption of children’s clothing
do children’s clothing producers
have, and what are the relationships
between these understandings and
children’s choices as consumers?
l What role does children’s clothing
consumption play in contributing
to experiences of social conditions,
such as exclusion and inclusion? The
main concern is with the differences
between wants and needs and when
pressures begin.
The research is ongoing, so there are no
findings to report at present.
3. Data Collection Methods
This is a small scale, ethnographic
study. It involves eight families carefully
selected to be illustrative of the
population over one year. In the spirit of
the new social studies of childhood, the
intention is to encourage the children to
influence the research agenda.
Study of children and
fashion consumption
25

26
on attitudes and concluded that parents
as well as children engaged in the
promotional activities of food, which
they also enjoyed. Parent’s main objective
was to buy food that was eaten, which
often meant fun food. The second piece
focused on research into the effects of
food promotion.
3. Policy Options
Following this research, the FSA published
a paper in November highlighting policy
options in a consultative process that will
be used to formulate a proposal. There
is a range of discussions organised until
the end of the year and a public debate
in January. A decision will be taken
early 2004 at the FSA Board meeting on
this process. The FSA is keen to find an
effective and practical solution. This is
made more difficult as the effects of food
promotion are tough to judge. However,
it is clear that partnerships will be key.
The FSA’s concern with regard to television
advertising concerns the diet that
advertising promotes and not individual
adverts; the emphasis is on unhealthy
food. A clear policy option could be an
increase in the promotion of healthier
options. However, television advertising
is not the whole issue. Other areas of
concern are the composition of foods
aimed at children, labelling and catering.
An area of contention in policy is whether
the individual should be empowered to
make their own decisions or whether
legislation should be used to intervene.
Another issue is when voluntary
legislation should be used in place of
statutory control. The advantages of
voluntary legislation are speed and
flexibility. It is clear, however, that in
some areas legislation can be the best
solution, such as where consistency is
required in labelling.
4. Conclusion
Children’s diets are a very important issue
and doing nothing is not an option. It is
clear that promotions form part of the mix
of influences on children’s diet, which is a
clear reason for some intervention. Today,
the issue is how this should be tackled.
Guy Parker
Director, Advertising Practice,
Advertising Standards Authority
1. Background
Advertising in the UK is a mix of statutory
and self-regulatory legislation. The
Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)
applies to the non-broadcast sector and
is a self-regulatory code called the British
Code of Advertising and Sales Promotions.
The code is written by the Committee of
Advertising Practice, which represents
the marketing and media industry. The
code is not wholly voluntary in that if a
company is not a member of one of the
trade associations represented on the
Committee, it does not mean the company
is exempt from the Code.
Decisions on whether a breach has
taken place are taken by the ASA, which
is independent of the industry and
Government. The Code covers advertising,
sales promotion and direct marketing,
but not packaging, unless shown in an
advertisement.
2. Steps to Protect Children
In the Code there is a section covering
children. Rules prohibit the encouragement
of pester power; showing children in
dangerous situations that may be
emulated; encouraging children to feel
inferior if they do not purchase; and
encouraging excessive consumption to
participate in promotions.
Specifically, the Code addresses the
advertising of food to children: ‘marketing
communications addressed to or targeted
at children should not actively encourage
them to eat or drink at or near bedtime,
to eat frequently throughout the day or
replace main meals with confection or
snack foods.’ There is no rule about the
volume of non-broadcast advertising to
children, which would be difficult to enforce.
3. Surveys
The ASA has considered less than ten
complaints since the food clause was
included in 1998 and the ASA are not
aware of any problem in this area. In
July 2003, the ASA carried out a survey
into marketing targeted at children.
The sample consisted of 475 original
press advertisements, over 100 internet
advertisements, 50 posters, 39 cinema
commercials and 34 on-pack sales
promotions. Six press advertisements
and one internet advertisement were
considered to have broken the code,
which were for technical breaches
that were not complained about. Nine
press advertisements were regarded as
questionable, all of these were in two
issues of a computer games magazine.
Seven of these contained adult content in
a publication with a large readership
aged under 16. The remaining two
adverts were for computer games that
were deemed to contain too much
blood and gore, which would breach the
code against encouraging anti-social
behaviour. The overall rate of compliance
was 97 per cent.
The issue of inappropriate advertisements
in computer game magazines where the
audience comprises children has also been
raised in another survey on internet
advertisements. In this survey the main
issue was advertisements for adult
services appearing on portals that
are also used by a significant number
of children.
4. Complaints
During the first six months of 2003,
68 complaints about advertisements
targeted at children were heard by
the ASA Council and 22 of these were
investigated. Six of these were for food
and only one was upheld, as it was
a direct mailing targeted at children
deemed to be too young to decipher the
The methods that will be used are:
l Unstructured interviews regarding
the purchase, significance and
management of clothing.
l Observation of family activities, such
as family shopping.
l Clothing purchase diaries kept by
the family.
l Bi-monthly interviews on diary
entries.
l Photography by children of the
purchase process and use of clothing.
l Write and draw techniques for younger
children where other methods may not
be effective.
4. Conclusion
The knowledge that is being sought in
this research is based in three related
areas. First, the development of children
as active consumers of clothing, which
thereby clarifies debates about the
commodification of childhood and the
changing position of children with regard
to adults. It is expected that the results
shall show that children demonstrate
intelligence in their purchase choices.
Secondly, the ways in which the
consumption of children’s clothing is
mediated through general relations in the
household, peers and interaction of the
producers of clothes. Finally, there is the
political and cultural significance of the
expansion of consumption practices in
childhood. Specifically, this includes the
symbolic value of children’s clothing as
a form of social inclusion and exclusion
mediated by age, gender, ethnicity etc.
The point is to recognise that children are
not all the same but different.
Questions and Panel
Answers
Q Why did you not discuss the
sexualisation of children’s clothing?
A It is not ruled out and it will be
engaged if it appears in the results. It
is an important issue and would be
included in the study of clothes and the
body. The interesting factor is whether
children or parents highlight it.
Q Is desire in food constructed in
the same way as clothing, such as
through inclusion and identity?
A As with clothes, this is a dynamic
issue between sellers and buyers
and is also a social dynamic. I also
believe that children are savvy media
consumers, but they are not able to
fully respond to the media with an
adult’s rationale. This is why we need
rules to protect children.
Q So this concerns children’s
capacity to be responsible?
A Children have the skills to understand
commercial communications, but they
do not have the capacity to understand
the wider picture, such as the
motivation behind an advert.
Q The Food Commission ran a
campaign called the ‘Parent’s
Jury’ that was established one
and a half years ago to represent
parent’s concerns at food
marketed at children. The flaw in
arguing that responsibility falls on
the parents is that they are not
always in full control of children
throughout the day. The media
place a great deal of blame on
parents, but blame should be
spread across the whole sector of
those involved in what children eat.
A This debate need not be a blame-game
whereby parts of society are singled
out. There are many problems that are
universal in their impact across the
world, but there is something specific to
the UK in part of this. This may be due
to the school dinner diet being worse.
The sexualisation of children’s clothes is
more extreme in British retailing than
elsewhere. Before blame is distributed,
it should be asked why British children
are more exposed in society than
those in other countries. Possible
reasons are the regulatory regimes,
long working hours and public service
reform. The debate often takes place
with an assumption of a purely free
market economy, however, in reality
consumption is collective in many
instances, such as with school meals.
Rosemary Hignett
Head, Food Labelling Division,
Food Standards Authority
1. The Issue
The work being undertaken at the FSA
concerns what children are eating, which
is too much saturated fat, added sugar
and salt, and not enough fruit and
vegetables. Much survey work has been
carried out to see what children eat and
the statistics found have been shocking.
Less than half of school lunch boxes
contain fruit or vegetables. Ready meals
for children have been found to have a
very high salt content. These statistics
lead to an impact on children’s health in
both the short and long term.
The obesity statistics for children are
8 per cent of six year-olds and 15 per
cent of 15 year-olds. Obesity is more
concentrated in lower income groups.
2. Causes
Food promotion and children’s diet form
only a part of the issue. With obesity,
activity is also an issue. Furthermore, diet
involves many different factors beyond
promotional activity. Thus, it is necessary
to have a range of activities to tackle
the issues.
The importance in schools is paramount,
which concerns education, understanding
nutrition, learning how to cook and
school dinners. However, this is not
enough as parents, industry and
marketing should also take a role.
The FSA’s approach is to look at the
evidence base. Two pieces of research
have been undertaken. The first focused
Food Standards
Authority
Advertising Standards
Authority
27

28
message. These figures are similar to the
same period in 2002 when 63 complaints
were heard and 23 investigated. A
potential reason for this is that people
tend to complain about individual
advertisements rather than categories
of advertisements.
The ASA is monitoring the public debate
on obesity and is not complacent because
very few complaints are received. Where
statements in advertising are made that
cannot be substantiated and where claims
play on the incredulity of children or
exploit the interests of parents, the ASA
will investigate.
The ASA is willing to take action
against large companies. For example,
in 2000 the ASA banned an advert by
SmithKlineBeecham. The ASA will also
act independently and proactively, rather
than only in response to a complaint, and
will take immediate action
where necessary.
The debate over food advertising is not
matched in complaints to the ASA. In
2002, the ASA received 1,200 complaints
about advertising and children, which is
the main area of concern to parents.
Ian Blair
Deputy Director, Programmes
and Advertising Group,
Independent Television
Commission
1. Background
The Independent Television Commission
(ITC) is soon to be replaced by Ofcom
(Office of Communications). Ofcom
is an aggregation of many different
communications regulators. It will
continue the practice of awarding licenses
to broadcast and to enforce codes, as
the previous individual regulators did
beforehand. However, Ofcom are currently
in consultation over proposals to
outsource the regulation of
broadcast advertising to the ASA. This
would be a co-regulatory partnership
and if approved would be implemented
in mid-2004. If this were to take place,
broadcast regulation would be self-
regulatory, although the regulator would
retain legal power and the power to
sanction broadcasters.
2. Broadcast Advertising Rules
ITC rules are designed to prevent
television adverts from misleading,
causing deep or widespread offence
or harm to viewers. The protection
of children is the most important
aspect of the ITC’s rules. All television
advertisements must be pre-cleared
because television advertising is deemed
to be so powerful and advertisements
are difficult to avoid. The Broadcast
Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC)
carries out pre-vetting on behalf of
broadcasters. However, the BACC look
at individual advertisements, not the
social context.
3. Rules to Protect Children
The general rules to prevent misleading
advertising are supplemented by rules
to protect children’s inexperience and
credulity being exploited. There are
rules against encouraging bullying, to
prevent the encouragement of children
to risk physical or moral harm, or behave
in anti-social ways, and to limit the risk
of children pestering adults for products.
These types of rules can never be
completely effective. There are also rules
for advertisements of toys over £25 to
show their price, to prevent exploitation
from children’s attachments to particular
programmes, such as spin-offs, and to
prevent advertisements to make children
feel inferior because they do not have a
certain product.
4. Food Advertising
The rules make it clear that adverts
should not undermine progress to
national diet improvements, mislead or
confuse consumers or set bad examples
for children. On the other hand, the rules
reason that it cannot be expected to
perform the same role as public education
and information in promoting a varied
and balanced diet. Any nutrition and
health claims must be supported by
scientific evidence and advertisements
making such claims must not give
misleading impression of any dietary
benefits of using the product. Also,
advertisements must not encourage
excessive consumption, they must avoid
disparaging good dietary practice and any
product comparisons must not discourage
a selection of options such as fresh
fruit and vegetables. However, this does
not mean that the ITC can encourage
advertisements of these foods. Finally,
advertisements must not encourage poor
oral health.
5. Additional Rules
Currently, there is much debate about
these rules and whether to introduce
a new set to increase the control of
advertising to children, particularly in
relation to food. The ITC is open to
this debate.
Advertising of food to children is a public
policy debate, but viewers are generally
not engaged in taking part in debating
public policy. The ITC receives very few
complaints in this area, which is not
because viewers do not care, but most
probably because they do not know how
to engage in the debate. This is an area
that needs a solution.
It is important that a debate takes
place based on evidence and looks at
advertising in context. It is not the only
cause of a poor diet. The ITC welcomes
the contribution by the Hastings report
on the effect of promotion on children’s
diet. All facets of the argument need to
be looked at. The various contributory
factors of a poor diet and all evidence
needs to be considered before a
conclusion is reached on what measures
should be adopted to tackle this problem.
In its first few months, Ofcom will look
into this area.
Research shows that television
advertising is not the most powerful
influence on children’s desire for products.
The ITC has found that children quickly
learn to be advertising literate, which
parents often under estimate. Studies by
the ITC have led it to believe that its
rules are misleading and it is ready to
tackle this.
In relation to the debate of whether food
advertising should be banned for certain
products during certain programmes,
more research is necessary. It should
also be noted that children watch
far more programmes than children’s
television. Although childhood obesity is
a problem, it must be considered whether
banning advertisements from children’s
programmes would make a difference. It
requires a cautious approach balancing
the effect of a ban with the consequences
of restricting a large revenue source for
commercial television.
Regarding the argument that the context
of advertisements affects the degree
of absorption by children, there is no
evidence to support this. Thus, the
fundamental question concerns to what
extent this is a broad cultural problem or
a result of advertising on television.
Questions and Panel
Answers
Q Do you have the power to regulate
the increase in sound volume of
adverts?
A There are rules. The advertisers compact
more sound close together to increase
the volume.
Q Would the FSA consider a
behavioural change campaign to
tackle the issue of obesity?
A Spending more money on campaigns to
promote healthy eating is an option. If
the concern is that the healthy eating
message is being drowned out by
advertisements for less healthy food,
then we can either increase the number
of healthy messages or decrease the
number of unhealthy messages. The
problem is that increasing the healthy
diet message involves a large amount of
public money. Therefore, it is not likely
to be a solution.
Q Will the pre-vetting of advertising
be lost with the transition to
Ofcom? Is providing children’s
television part of the public service
broadcasting obligation?
A Pre-vetting will continue. Children’s
programmes are part of public service
broadcast obligations.
Q What will you do about computer
gaming advertising through
cookies?
A Cookies enable information to be stored
about a person who visits a website so
that they are recognised when they next
visit and enable banner advertisements
to be targeted to the individual. Third
party advertising servers provide this
advertising and the problem is that
they are often too indiscriminate in
targeting advertisements. They will
increasingly form part of the solution.
Q The Health Select Committee heard
that Abbott Mead Vickers discussed
pester power in a brief. What can
be done against pester power? Will
Ofcom be able to address these
issues, which involve advertising
agencies and companies?
A Advertising agencies are represented
by the Institute of Practitioners in
Advertising and they sign up to the
code, so agencies are also subject to
the rules. The Chief Executive of Abbott
Mead Vickers has admitted that it was
a mistake for the brief to contain a
reference to pester power. The ASA
would not condone this as their concern
is with the finished advertisement.
A That particular advert was released
with no evidence of pester power
present. All television adverts are
pre-cleared by the BACC, but they have
no power over what the brief contains
or on intention. They can only work on
the finished advertisement and not the
brief or the script.
Q Do self-regulatory bodies have the
power to fine?
A ITC, the Radio Authority and Ofcom all
have the powers to fine broadcasters,
which is normally imposed for
consistent breaches or a very serious
breach. Ofcom will retain power to
impose fines, even under co-regulation.
A If advertisers are already bending
the rules, this strengthens the case
for statutory regulation in place of
self-regulation.
A The ASA’s rules are very similar to the
ITC and the Radio Authority. Decisions
taken are robust and the sanctions
laid out are effective. The ASA is
not seen as a soft alternative to the
statutory bodies.
Q Are there any ASA rules regarding
the personal endorsement of
products?
A There is no rule in the ITC or ASA
codes that prevent celebrities from
endorsing certain foods. There are rules
regarding endorsements, testimonials
and children. The majority of these
endorsements appear on television.
Q Do you have any influence over the
collusion of programme makers
and advertisers?
A There are rules to preserve the integrity
of programmes from spin-offs. This is
detailed and included in the code.
Q Regarding the Health Select
Committee, the regulation currently
looks at the finished product, so
if there is no obvious breach
then there is no problem. The
The Independent
Television Commission
29

30
current practice of purely judging
the finished product is deficient
as in reality it is the way a
communication is interpreted that
is most important. How do you
consider whether an advert has
pester power and how it
is interpreted?
A The public see the commercial and not
the brief. If the brief has been seen
by the BACC and there is an area of
contention, then the advertiser will be
warned which would result in this being
withdrawn from the final commercial.
It would be very contentious for
regulators to get involved before the
advert was made.
Q This area is complicated by the
fact that although advertisers
target children, the ultimate aim
is for the parent to purchase the
product. It is a debate over what
is appropriate in the intended
communication between the
parent and the child as to what
pester power is. The problem with
the current codes is that they
do not address the balance of
advertising. They do not reflect the
effect of advertising as a whole
on behaviour.
A This is a very complex and difficult area
to define, thus it is difficult to detect.
Mary MacLeod
The secretary of State, Tessa Jowell,
had planned to be here for this seminar,
but had to withdraw. She sent a
message apologising for her absence,
saying how important this area is.
She feels that although advertising
is a factor contributing towards
obesity, there are other issues such as
exercise. This is why the Government
is committed to spending £459 million
on sports at schools over the next
three years. She believes the code on
advertising needs to be sufficient and
adhered to.
Jeremy Preston
Director, Food Advertising Unit,
Advertising Association
1. Background
The obese situation is well known. It
should be noted that adults are also obese
and the potential reasons underlying
that have been considered. Was it due to
television advertising during the 1970s?
The food and advertising industries are
often cited as the sole source of the
problem. However, the industry not only
wants to see the issue addressed but
also wishes to take part in providing a
long-term solution. Ten days ago, the
Advertising Association (AA), which
represents all major players in the UK,
issued a joint statement welcoming the
FSA consultation paper on policy.
2. Challenges
The challenge is how the food and
advertising industries, government,
health and education professionals, and
parents can successfully address this
problem. A further challenge is to develop
plans that are based on sound facts and
not emotional responses. For example,
there is no evidence to support a ban on
advertising during children’s programmes.
In Quebec, where a ban has been in
place for Francophile children, the levels
of obesity are no lower than any other
Canadian province.
Regarding the Hastings Report, the issue
facing the food and advertising industries
was to ensure that it was fully robust
because of its impact. The Advertising
Association has commissioned two fully
independent academics to look into
the report. The remit of the report was
the promotion of food to children and
the report has mainly concentrated on
television advertising, which the press
has picked up on. The authors of the
report were only able to use 0.4 per cent
of all reference studies when there were
many studies on this topic. Furthermore,
the three most quoted references failed to
show evidence that television advertising
affected children’s diets, 75 per cent of
the studies used were over 11 years old,
and 40 per cent of the studies used were
more than 20 years old.
3. Choices
Overweight and obesity are caused by
excessive eating and a lack of exercise.
The majority of the debate focuses on
excessive eating. Policy must be based on
a sound strategy with longevity. It must
consist of education, exercise, parenting
and diet, with education at the core. A
school curriculum should be developed to
promote healthy living.
Being a parent today is very difficult.
Recent research shows that 40 per cent of
parents believe that there is insufficient
information on labels, which is an area
that industry can help. The food industry
can and will develop healthy options,
but there must be consumer demand.
Government must assist by helping
children to exercise through assisting
schools in facilitating this.
All these choices have their own
challenges, which are mostly costs. All
members of society have a responsibility
to address the challenges and leave aside
the blame culture and pursue a strategy
that is practical, realistic and produces
qualified objectives.
Ed Mayo
Chief Executive, The National
Consumer Council
1. Introcuction
Gandhi said ‘first they ignore you, then
they laugh at you, then they fight you
and then you win.’ We are currently in the
third phase. All the studies and debates
have concluded that a worsening diet
causes disorders that can decrease life
expectancy. The choices at the centre
of the debate appear to be individual
ones, but what is certain is that the
consequences are collective such as the
costs to the NHS, which is estimated to be
£2.1 million per year.
2. Myths
There are many myths in this debate. One
in particular is that there is no such thing
as a good food or a bad food. So how can
there be intervention in this issue? This is
pure sophistry and can be proved wrong,
not least because the advertising industry
is now increasingly promoting foods as
good or healthy.
3. Addressing the Issue
The four action points outlined by Jeremy
Preston are positive and it is clear that
we need a national strategy to pursue
the cause. The FSA is doing an effective
job, but it is essentially one step ahead of
Government and there is a need to bring
them up to speed. The National Consumer
Council (NCC) has been responsible
for bringing the issue of nutrition to
agricultural reform. All these ends
need to be tied so that there is a clear
sustainable vision for food and diet.
In addition to the four action points
already raised, there should be some
further points. The first concerns
regulation and the debate of whether to
ban food advertising aimed at children,
which has been ongoing. Today, there are
many more bodies campaigning against
television advertising, however, this will
not resolve obesity alone. Both statutory
and self-regulation can play a role, but
within a wider strategy. Fiscal measures
should be analysed in the same vein as
tobacco is taxed.
The motive of industry fighting during this
phase is interesting, as this initiative
does not mean that pocket money and
parental spending on children will decrease.
So there is scope for business to sell in a
socially responsible way, which is what
parents seek.
Paul Jackson
Chairman, Media Smart
1. Need for Education
Having represented the advertising
industry in a debate with the European
Commission regarding responsible
advertising to children over the past two
years, it was explicit as to how highly
charged it is, how complex it is and that
there is no shared vision. The aim of
Media Smart was to find a shared vision,
which is based on education.
Media Smart is a media literacy
programme focused on advertising and
targets primary school children. The
programme provides in-school materials,
mapped to the national curriculum and
written by teachers with the aim of
helping children understand advertising.
Before launching the programme in 2002,
there was no media literacy education for
primary school children. It is a non-profit
organisation that uses the resources
of the advertising business, allied to
government requirements, with the help
of academic experts to address the needs
of parents to benefit children.
Advertisers recognise their responsibility
to actively help children critically
understand advertising in the context of
their daily lives.
2. Teaching Pack
The first pack was completed in February
and has been distributed to 5,000
teachers. The teaching profession has
found the packs to be helpful. As a result,
a literacy expert group has been founded
that is chaired by Professor Buckingham
with the aim of bringing together the
knowledge of those teaching children.
3. Advertising Literacy
Media Smart is focused on advertising
literacy. It is not fundamentally
concerned with the food advertising
debate. Parents, who are under
represented on the analysis of the impact
of policy on children, have a crucial role
to play in this debate. Parents also have
a critical role to play in media literacy
and the development of media literacy
programmes. Experts agree that children
benefit from having their parents watch
television with them in order to dissect
the complex messages that are common.
When Media Smart was established it
worked with the European Parents
Association and the National Confederation
of Parent and Teachers Associations,
which became a charity partner, and they
have become closely involved in the
formation of the programme.
3. Media Smart’s Aims
Media Smart calls for all stakeholders in
the debate to work together. The model
that has been developed by Media Smart
is the best way forwards as it brings
the stakeholders together. Furthermore,
empowering children and families is an
important part of the solution. Media
Smart also hopes that the NFPI will use its
knowledge to inform this debate.
Panel Discussion: The
Way Forward, Choices
and Challenges
Advertising
Association
The National
Consumer Council
Media Smart
31

Hard sell soft targets parents talk about marketing to children report

Hard sell soft targets parents talk about marketing to children report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Hard sell soft targets parents talk about marketing to children report

Similar to Hard sell soft targets parents talk about marketing to children report (20)

More from Family and Childcare Trust

More from Family and Childcare Trust (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Hard sell soft targets parents talk about marketing to children report