It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Adverts impact on children probed

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 02:17 AM

Adverts impact on children probed

The government is launching a major inquiry into the possible harmful effects of advertising on children.

The probe, being announced as part of a wide-ranging 10-year plan for children, comes amid fears a commercialisation of childhood is fuelling social problems.

It will look at evidence of links between adverts and dissatisfaction, anxiety, eating disorders and drinking.

Children see some 10,000 TV adverts a year and recognise 400 brands by age 10, Children's Secretary Ed Balls says.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 02:17 AM
About time someone looked into the effects of advertising.

I've detested adverts for years. I even gave up watching TV over 7 years ago due to the rubbish shown on it.

Advertising, imo, is a major cause of lots of societies troubles. Too much emphasis on glamorous things nobody needs. Way too many discriminations, showing us that by buying the best toys, designer clothing or jewelery will make us more beautiful, more popular.

being a celebrity is more important to a lot of children and teenagers. For lots of people, the reality of life is such a system shock when the brainwashing fails, or is opposed, that some can't handle the truth. Hence the follow on effect of a lack of care, lack of interest in society and others.

The brain learns it can't believe everything so refuses to interact in the manner that others want.

TV is a major problem, not just the advertising, yet having a go at the adverts is a start.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 03:04 AM
I also hate those adverts that have really annoying catchy songs, they always stick in my head for days and drive me crazy. This would probably have a more adverse affect on children.

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 05:07 PM
reply to post by Extralien

i was going to say that they've been doing studies on this for years. the problem is the wrong people are doing it. all the ad agencies already know what attracts people to whatever junk they are selling.

at least now someone is doign something about it.

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:18 PM

Originally posted by Cthulwho
I also hate those adverts that have really annoying catchy songs, they always stick in my head for days and drive me crazy. This would probably have a more adverse affect on children.

besides feeding them a taste for even crappier music than whats available today...

This is an intriguing study. I have flagged and starred you for it! Now... Might I suggest to all atsers... If you have cable, or satellite tv get a DVR from your provider... No Commericals! (fastforward is a god send) also you can buy a personal one from any electronics store... I've yet to use one, but the DVR's have worked fine for a few years.

Well worth the investment... After all... there are some good channels out there still (Discovery, History, The Science Channel, National Geographic, ATS' up and coming show affiliate channels
just to name a few)

Hopefully we can get a wrap on some of the advertisers, but in the mean time we can at least skip what we don't want to see (gotta love tech-naw-low-gee)

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:27 PM
oh yes...excellent.

children are so open they are the easiest to brainwash.

and thanks for posting something positive about a governments actions. That is rare around here.

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:39 PM

Originally posted by homeskillet

they've been doing studies on this for years. the problem is the wrong people are doing it. all the ad agencies already know what attracts people to whatever junk they are selling.

Indeed, the advertising industry has been studying us for decades! The advertising industry has, over the years, studied exactly what motivates people -- of all age groups. They have a vested interest in understanding how they can actually induce people to purchase the products that they are selling. The "Admen" know exactly how to reinforce public opinion or, for that matter, cause people to change their opinions.

I view the advertising industry in the same light as the tobacco industry. These guys "know" what they are doing and they also probably "know" the effects of their actions.

Instead of studying the advertising industry and their effect on people, in this case children, we should be demanding a Congressional hearing on the social engineering and manipulation techniques that have been brought to bear upon the American people.

Of course this will never happen. The very same people in Congress who might investigate the advertising industry also rely on this industry to assure them their seats in the House and the Senate!

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:28 AM

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant

Instead of studying the advertising industry and their effect on people, in this case children, we should be demanding a Congressional hearing on the social engineering and manipulation techniques that have been brought to bear upon the American people.

I do agree with what you're saying here, benevolent.

But with all due respect, you cannot localise this as just a problem for the American people.

This is a global issue. This is going on in every home, every street, every shop all over the world.

If anyone is going to have the power to stop this then it is people power. As has been stated, the governments are a part of the problem and will in no way wish to enforce something that would bring about a drastic change on how they operate.

We, the people of Earth must do something for ourselves. It is up to us to do something.

How long do you suppose a study will take? What answers do you suspect they will conclude? What plans would be laid down to stop this terrible infliction upon us? How long would court action take to begin proceedings against such things?

And most importantly of all, although unfortunate and totally irrelevant in my opinion as this and many other issues can be resolved without this worry, how much is it going to cost?

We know that it would be the tax payer that would ultimately foot the bill. Even if a government did take the financial burden, the cost would eventually be trickled down to us, those who are made to pay taxes.

I know some people who were asked by an advertising company to cut down a tree so that pedestrians and drivers could see an advertising bill board. The tree is still there, but the advertising board has gone

In the Philippines, they have these huge scaffold assemblies for advertising. These have been recently deemed dangerous in times of bad weather and strong winds, yet they still exist as it's a financial commodity that the Philippine government seems reluctant to do anything about.

Perhaps there are thousands of similar stories all over the world, and for what, the latest gadgets and fashions and in certain countries, particularly parts of Africa right now, cigarette adverts.

With tobacco advertising banned in many Western countries, cigarette manufacturers are increasingly targeting countries in Africa.

And more and more Africans are taking up the habit.

Nigeria's government says it has begun legal action against three leading international cigarette companies.

It is demanding more than $40bn in compensation over their alleged role in promoting underage smoking.

The companies concerned are British American Tobacco (BAT), Philip Morris and International Tobacco Ltd.

So, here we see a move to influence those that are most susceptible to advertising, those who are not used to it in such large quantities. One day, maybe, all these people will have advert bearing TV's. It may already be too late for them as who has the power and the finances to take this message of anti-adverts to them?

As much as I hate to admit it, I don't have the cash or the power to do so, but writing here is a start and at least might have some influence.

Can we make contact with those in Nigeria who are against the smoking and advertising of smoking? Can this contact be the start of a world wide campaign to halt advertising tricks. Someone in Nigeria is prepared to do something and obviously has some clout. So why not us. Why can't we get together with them and really do something for once?

I think they would agree with us and may possibly ATS'ers and others resolve this major concern.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:12 AM
Im not sure about this....

The goverment(s) are probably looking into this NOT for the benifit of the worlds children, but more so to see how better to use advert. I hear speak of brainwash and "being dummied down" all the time when it comes to governments or ruling parties. Could they be masking this as "child protection from advert", when in fact they have other motives?

Im not saying "they" are.. Just wondering after the lies and cover ups, how can we really know.

I do know that I have seen some people watch TV. Its quite funny sometimes. They almost look dead as they just stare at it. Mouth slightly open, glazed over look in thier eyes, and well... dead.

I like the DVR idea. Puts the control back in our hands where it should be. More over is the power just to shut that thing off. Like so many say... WAKE UP!!!

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:37 AM

Originally posted by Extralien
you cannot localise this as just a problem for the American people.

I definitely agree. I am sorry that my "North American bias" came across in my post.

You are correct Exralien when you say this is something that is a global problem. Advertising is, indeed, universal....well, ok, global. Still we are all subject to the subtle (and sometimes 'not so subtle') manipulation that is being done through advertising. Thirsty? Reach for a Coke. Hungry? How about a 'Big Mac? It's endless! And we are all powerless to avoid advertising. Sure, we can turn off our television sets and our radios but, still, we can't avoid advertising.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:05 AM
I have a question.

What about suicide?

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 04:50 AM
reply to post by TheoOne

Please explain.

Are you suggesting that adverts may have the potential for suicidal tendencies in children?

If it were, it would be damning evidence indeed if a link could be proven.

Please expand on this thought of yours.

grammar edit

[edit on 10/12/07 by masqua]

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 05:00 AM
To get some balance into this:

There is nothing wrong with advertising. We all advertise...even here at ATS we advertise for our threads. We are all participating in a war for attention, competing for the minds of people.

But with children its a different story, because their ability to choose and filter is not yet fully developed. And thats why they mustnt be exposed to too much of our grabbing for their attention. Anything you recommend to a child, they naively subscribe to with a wide open heart. While I dont recommend being all too protective of children, I wont deliberately go advertising for nike, mconalds, coke, windows vista or even ATS towards a child.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 06:48 AM
reply to post by Extralien

while i agree that advertising is a dirty business, and should be probed, i believe that a lot of society's problems can also be attributed to a decline in parenting over the years. parents nowadays don't want to take responsibility for their child's behavior, or exert any control on how their children grow up. this isn't to say that every parent in the world is a bad parent, but more and more im seeing parents blame what's wrong with their kids on things other than their lack of involvement in their chidlren's life.

don't get me wrong, i know advertising is everywhere and cannot be avoided, and in mosst cases is downright manipulative, but the biggest influence in a childs life isn't a snickers ad or a burger king ad, it is the parent, and if it's not, then the parent should look at the impact they are having, and try to make a change.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:06 AM
Reclaim our visual space...

Televisions can be switched off and the offending adverts along with them, but billboards...they ruin an otherwise visually appealing streetscape, cannot be 'turned off' in any way and are so oversized as to be read by drivers speeding by, but dominate the surrounding visual space to what can we do?

As defined under UK Planning Consent Law:
"Planning Permission is usually required for virtually all hoardings, illuminated signs out the deemed consent allowances, facia signs and projecting signs on shop-fronts or business premises which are higher than 4.6m above ground level and most advertisements on gable ends. You also need permission for signs advertising goods not sold at the premises where the sign is situated."

Any structure that requires planning consent is also required to publish notifications at the intended site (usually affixed to a nearby lamppost or fence...keep your eyes peeled for A4 size laminated notices as this is the usual format used to notify the community ) and in the local press at least one month prior to the application being granted to allow for any oppositions to be made

The vast majority of the current billboards have been erected illegally, no tax is collected on them that could benefit the local community, and the owners of the boards, such as Clearwater and JC Decaux make huge profits for free at our visual expense...

I'm not sure exactly how to go about finding out whether consent has been granted on these structures, but I'll ask my planning and building regulations lecturer tomorrow and post his answer least its one step in the right direction

[edit on 10-12-2007 by citizen smith]

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:07 AM

Kids view an average of 40,000 ads per year—and many of them are for potentially harmful products. That's why the need for media literacy has never been more important, says a new, finger-wagging report in a recent issue of Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatricians.

It's known as advertising, but we may as well call it psychological warfare. Our entire society is a free-fire zone for nonstop commercial assaults. Everyone is in the cross hairs -- no matter how young. And quite a few professionals with formal training in psychology have enlisted in the never-ending war.

In the midst of "the sale of psychological expertise to advertisers to manipulate children for monetary gain," the signers add, "the profession does very little to protect innocent children -- the people it is supposed to help -- from the psychological cajoling and assaults that it itself helps to create."

Commercial advertising is about psychological manipulation. As such, the "better" an ad is, the worse it is. Whenever we forget that -- even for a moment -- we're in peril.

The increasing commercial exploitation of children is fuelling a rise in bullying, obesity and depression among Britain's youngsters, according to a recent study.

The National Union of Teachers warns that children must be "protected" against increasingly sophisticated marketing and advertising tactics that present "several levels of danger" to young people.

Celebrity endorsements, film sponsorship, magazines, posters and the Internet, are all encouraging children to eat badly, even though they know they should choose fruit and vegetables.

As this is totally obvious, this is a major problem that is being fought by a large amount of people already, and we have joined the ranks.

I had no real idea as to how much was being done until this thread started and I delved further into the topic.

I am sure that we can find many more web sites and news reports relating to this matter and maybe we can take this a step further.

Bringing together the information and building a map of the problem is a way to help show others what is going on.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:13 AM
I doubt this study will do much. Way more effort is currently going in to developing ways to expand advertising.

Ads in DVD's

Or the Phillips patent that would force you to watch commercials

With all of the bad things for our children that the government allows or even sponsors, I don't see them drawing a line in the sand with advertising. There is far too much money involved.

The only thing that can be done (in my opinion) is for parents to step in and turn off the TV and limit their exposure to Ads. Be involved in you childrens life, don't let the TV tell them who they should be.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:21 AM
I read in Naomi Klein's 'No Logo' some time ago that US schoolchildren were required to take a 'consumer education' class which involved having to watch a student-network TV station called 'Channel One' which she describes being practically wall-to-wall advertising, and that the advertising sponsors in return 'donated' large amounts of funding to the school.

I couldn't believe what I was reading, did/does this still happen in US schools?

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:25 AM
I have a personal rule that would be very interesting if everyone in America adopted. I don't buy anything I see advertised on TV (or any other mainstream media).

Most of the companies who advertise on TV have huge amounts of money and their products are generally unsafe. They are in business because they are greedy and will do anything to make their product more appealing to the masses, even if it makes their product unhealthy or dangerous.

I'd rather buy products that are made by companies whose primary goal is to have their products be safe and effective.

And if I had kids, I'd limit their TV exposure and teach them why they really should not want the products they're seeing advertised. They would at least grow up with a good understanding of how society is so easily manipulated.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:27 AM
reply to post by citizen smith

I watched channel 1 when I was in high school. It was some pop culture news show that only lasted 10 or 15 minutes. I honestly don't remember the ads. It was mainly a time when kids were screwing off.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in