Written expression exercise from last week's video comprehension exercise.

Because I sent you the questions and the answer sheet to last week's video comprehension I didn't get a chance to read your thoughts to the final question. Sooooo I'd like you to copy and paste them here for me (or more likely write them for the first time ).

This was the question: 18. In about 150 words give your personal view on advertising targeting children.

Children are credulous and lack the ability to understand the strategies used by brands in advertising to encourage them to consume. Children's ads are generally cheerful and dynamic. They feature happy children playing with a toy. What the child understands is that it is the toy that makes them happy, and not the act of playing. For them, having this toy will also allow them to be happy, as shown in the ad. But it's not true, and they can't understant that at their age. As discussed in the video, ads teach children how to comsume, how to become consumers. I think it's sad because we're depriving them of their childhood. We've seen in the classroom that children are responsible for a large portion of family spending, and businesses use them to push families to consume.
The young generation was born with the internet and all the technological evolutions that we know today. It's part of their culture and we have to accept that. Unfortunately we can't stop them from being in front of the screens. One solution would be to reduce their time in front of the screens and focus on outdoor activities. But for me, the best option is to teach them the secret of happiness. It's not enough to have the last toy to be happy. Happiness comes from oneself, and only from oneself. Obviously this is not in the interest of the brands but I think it can be a solution to reduce the impact of advertising on children.

My opinion is quite mixed on advertising targeting children. As a whole, I agree with all they said in the video about this. I think it’s very important to be attentive to children’s consumption socialization. Because today’s kids are tomorrow’s adults, and if we want a world less worse than it already is, it’s with the new generations that is starts. Firstly, the main problem for me, as said in the video, is the materialistic side the advertisements can inculcate in children. They only know have products, the wealth, earn money to buy useless things. I don’t think it’s only because of the advertising but it probably amplifies. The social between people, the value of human interaction is set aside for the personal good. They must learn from an early age to be a thoughtful and responsible consumer. So for this, it’s necessary to limit the screen time, especially during advertising, but also that the parents are present to guide them in their daily life. Children's advertising could indeed be redesigned to be less inciting and give better values, but I'm not sure marketers would agree with that!

I think advertising targeting children are not really a good thing. Indeed, for companies, it's just a way to sell more, and in the end to enlist them in this consumer society that wants us to consume more and more. However, it can also be good. The Eat Active campaign with its famous slogan "Eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day" has enabled every child of our generation to know that in order to eat a balanced diet it is necessary to eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day (the real impact of this campaign remains to be seen). When advertising is used to make children aware of important subjects, I find it interesting because it is when you are young that you have to be aware of important subjects such as the environment, health, etc... so that later on, as adults, these people know these problems and act to combat them. But if advertising is only used to get children to buy, then I don't see any point.

Personally I agree with the video that lot of children's advertising are a problem for them because it offers them unhealthy products most of the time. There must be better regulation of this type of advertising because it's not normal, for example, that 98% of food advertisements seen by children are unhealthy! There is also the problem related to the development of children who are very exposed to this kind of advertising as they become more materialistic with poorer school results as they grow up according to some studies.

However, I don't agree that children's ads should be banned completely, otherwise how else would companies sell their products?! Parents have a role to play in their children's education and they must be able to clearly explain their children about what the "real message" of advertising is. I also think that there are many products and toys that can be beneficial to children and their parents and unfortunately these products do not have enough advertising coverage and that is a problem for me! Maybe if children saw more advertising on books or healthy foods the problems associated with children's advertising wouldn't even arise! Products that create interactivity between parents and their children must also be more present in terms of advertising in order to combat the behavioural problems observed.

First of all, children don’t understand the purpose of advertisement. They don't understand that the ads want them to consume products they don't necessarily need. Thus marketers take advantage of children's innocence.
They create noisy and colorful ads, they represent happy kids playing with toys or enjoying treats. It creates a « feeling of need » for the child. Because they see other children playing and being happy, then they want to feel the same and for them it is this object that will be their source of joy.
As said in the video, children are becoming more and more materialistic. They think that happiness is in owning more things, having more toys, possesing again and again. They push their parents to buy for them. They don’t have the concept of money, they don’t understand that you have to pay to have something.
But companies need these ads to sell, they know that children are in front of the TV, and that it will help them to have more visibility.
It is the role of parents to regulate their children’s needs and teach them to be responsible consumers and how to be happy with non-material things.

In my opinion, advertising targeted at children is not really a good thing because it always encourages them to consume and buy new things. That's the purpose of advertising of course, and while it's not always good to see ads all the time, I don't think that's the most negative thing. The problem is that, as Brett says, it leads children to a false sense of happiness. They believe that you have to have a lot of money to buy a lot of toys and that's what happiness is all about. However, as the saying goes, "money doesn't make you happy" and neither does having too much of it.
As a result, they are becoming more and more materialistic and I don't think that educates them in the best way.
They then concentrate on having more and more toys and become capricious children who are not satisfied with anything. I find this sad because they become selfish and no longer see their relationship as a source of satisfaction and happiness.
And the studies the video talks about confirm it, they don't pay attention to others anymore and become more solitary so I don't think it's very good.

I think that brands and communication agencies have a lot to gain by communicating with children through TV advertising.

Indeed, in my opinion, this style of advertising creates a huge impact on children, even more than on adults, for several reasons.

Indeed, we can say that television is a reference medium at this age. It's what they like to do the most, it's an indoor leisure activity on which they spend a lot of time. Then, it is also a place of projection and socialization where children will be able to compare themselves, develop attractions, discover things... Moreover, this target group does not generally grasp the commercial meaning of advertising. Finally, I would say that at this age, the slightest visual stimulus will attract them.

Advertising agencies have understood that in order to attract children, they have a lot to bet on this means of communication since it is generally easy to rely on small details such as sounds and lights to reach their willingness to buy.

In my opinion, after watching the videos, advertising is not good for kids. Actually a lot of kids spend a lot of time watching TV, or play videos games, iPad… And the kids don’t really understand the advertising, so they are manipulating. On the video, they said the adversting take advantage of the kids and change their habit, they would like to buy more stuff, they become materialist. Also the advertising doesn’t affect only the kids brain, also their body because a lot of advertising are for food unhealthy like soda, candy, fast food… So they are influenced to consume more bad products and can have negative effect on their health ( diabetes, overweight…) So personally I think advertising for kids are not a good idea, because they are influencing from an early age, and they will grow up with and they will grow up being always influencing and will not assert their choices and their desires.

I don’t really know what to think about it. Cause it can be a good things if the products are interesting for children and make them develop skills and knowledge, and it can be a good learning precisely because they will be exposed to it their whole life. On the other hand, as children are still an innocent audience, which has no hindsight on what we show them. Advertisers know they can create a need, know how to introduce a product to sell it to a children. Children act on instinct, when something look like funny they want it.
I also think that the way we consume as a child has an impact on our relationship to consumption when we growing up. Today, kids are bombarded with ads all over their surroundings so it’s very hard to understand that what advertising shows is not necessarily the reality and it can give them reflexes of consumption based on compulsion without any reflexion.

Children are easily manipulated by advertisers. For them, advertisements are just another form of TV show or vidéo game. For younger children, they don't know the difference between a cartoon and an advertisement that uses the same kind of story and same animation, but the messages are very different.

So how are children supposed to distinguish between the fun they get from these media and the hidden messages of advertising?

They don't realize what's at stake behind these programs and think that the products they see on the Internet or on television reflect reality. It is therefore normal for them to identify with these products as children's heroes.

Personally, I don't find it normal that adults can manipulate children and children from a very young age for the sole purpose of making more money. Children should not think that the more they buy the happier they will be. This necessarily influences children in their decisions and it is no coincidence that most of them dream of making a lot of money rather than going to the moon.

I think that targeting children is the easiest way for brands to make profit. In fact, children are the perfect victim because they are hypnotized by TV (and unconscious of it) and are way more easily influenced by it than their parents. You just have to put some nice and bright colors, joyful and funny music and one of the many children’s role models (animated characters, singers, cute animals) on your ad to make it fantastic in the littlest ones’ eyes. For example, if you want to create an ad to sell a doll during Christmas time, think about using pastel colors, glitters, a jingle bells music and Katy Perry to play as an ambassador of the brand.
And then, the second part is even more efficient: it is not the brand which is promoting itself, but the children promoting it to their parents. And we all know that they can get really annoying when demanding something… So, most parents give up and buy them what they want. Victory for brands!

Advertising is interesting for adults or people old enough to understand that is an advertising and not the real life, and to understand that sometimes you can not have the product in the adversiting. It is dangerous for children because they cannot make any difference, they don’t the value of money because they don’t have any. The advertising also as to be less important in the life of a kid, he doesn’t have to see one every time he is playing. Video games and television sometimes use adervising in the game or in the program of the cartoon so it is a problem of watching less screens in general to watch less advertising but brands have to understand that it is toxic for kids as well.

I have two opposite point of view, the first speaking as a future marketer and the second being conscious about how unethical it can be if we cross the line.
In marketing children are an unbelievable opportunity, it’s incredible how a brand can educate since the very young age. Of course, they cannot buy products but a child can be so intelligent, they learn really young how to obtain something and they pretty often manage to have it. It’s proved that a child learns by copying and the repetition is the key, that’s why for example the song “baby shark” has been a success. I think there is so many possibilities for brands in targeting children in their advertisement as we don’t put them into a pigeonhole (except with gender but it recently starts to change). So, for an animal toys for example, every single child will be affected and grow up with it, if you are a brand which provide products for teenagers or adults, they will remember you and maybe continue to buy your products.
In a second part I think it’s a shame because brands don’t let children be children, every advertisement educate them to be a consumer but we should not do that. There is this huge unethical fact that frustrate me, I cannot imagine my future child telling me that is best childhood memory is a jingle of a brand or something like that. I want them to be able to invent and imagine games outside or inside by themselves, without a real product and without five “different” copy of it.