Advertising to Children – An Emotional Election Topic

by Magdalena Stepien, senior associate, APCO Fast Moving Consumer Goods Practice

When Primark removed padded bras for children from its stores last week following public outcry, party leaders were quick to condemn the sale of ‘sexualised’ goods to children, branding it a ‘disgrace’ (David Cameron), calling retailers ‘greedy’ (Lynne Featherstone, Liberal Democrats equality spokesman) and the commercialisation of childhood ‘wrong’ (Gordon Brown).

Clearly, inappropriate clothing should not be sold to children. However, this example is part of a wider global debate about the effect advertising can have on children that spans a number of industries such as food, drink and toys. So what are the major parties pledging to do about this topic?

The Conservatives are currently taking the strongest stance on the issue, claiming that they are prepared to legislate if need be. In concrete terms, this could mean far reaching measures such as “preventing any marketing or advertising company found to be in serious breach of rules governing marketing to children from bidding for government advertising contracts for three years” to banning viral marketing techniques from being used in campaigns targeting children and introducing an online complaint system that allows parents to name and shame companies they deem to market irresponsibly. This last idea is also echoed by the Labour Party, which state in their manifesto that they will “ask Consumer Focus to develop a website for parents to register their concerns about sexualized products aimed at their children.” Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats are concentrating their efforts on airbrushing, which they claim should be banned to prevent children from developing an unhealthy body image.

All parties are keen to address this issue, which proves that the debate about advertising to children is far from over. APCO worldwide represents two organizations, Media Smart and the Advertising Education Forum (AEF) which are concerned with advertising issues. Ofcom regulation implemented in 2006, which bans advertising of food deemed unhealthy around children’s programmes, is only the tip of the iceberg. Since then, the debate has moved on considerably, with the focus of civil campaign groups shifting to other industries, such as toys and clothing, and away from television advertising and towards new online marketing techniques. The undercurrent to this emotional topic is that children should be protected from all exposure to commercial communications. It remains to be seen how far the future government will go in terms of regulating on these issues, but the appetite for taking radical steps is there, reinforced by various enquiries and expert opinions commissioned by the current government.

While legislation appears to be a popular fix, one aspect to this debate, which has so far not been addressed by any of the major parties, is the issue of education. To what extend should children be taught that there is a commercial purpose behind advertising, and that airbrushing leads to unrealistic images? Would it not be more desirable to empower them to understand and challenge advertising messages, rather than be kept in the dark about them?

Of course, this does not mean that there should not be any boundaries and rules around marketing to children. However, in my opinion, and in the words of Professor David Buckingham, (who led the government review on the “Impact of the Commercial World on Children’s Wellbeing”), overall “the commercial world is not going to disappear. Children and parents need to understand it and deal with it.”