Advertising to Children (ethical question)

In this class, we always need to remember that “ethics” means trying to do what’s right when the law hasn’t decided for us. And so when I look at the issue of advertising to children under this lens—under this sense of the word—I think that advertising to kids is undoubtedly deserves to be monitored, if not strictly regulated.

I know that Mr. Basham and Mr. Luik can safely say that there is no direct link between marketing and harm, but is that reason enough? Reports have shown that there is no credible link between violent videogames and real-life violence (Casey)—but is that to say that parents are acting ethically when they buy their 6-year old a copy of Grand Theft Auto? Just because there is no law saying we cannot do an act doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t feel bad doing it.  

What no one can question is that children are impressionable. And in fact, the years leading up to adolescence can be among the most impressionable—the years in which they are watching the most television, or looking at the most screens. While there may not (yet) be a cause found between harm and marketing to children, is that to say that we don’t mind filling our children’s head with images of things to buy? My vote is that, no, there probably isn’t a link between harm and advertising. But that doesn’t make it right. There was also no direct harm in children smoking candy cigarettes, but no one would argue that that story ended up as a success. The APA has stated that, when it comes to tobacco and alcohol, advertising did leave the children with positive attitudes towards such consumption.

Of course, that cigarette analogy leads me to a question; is it worth exploring that there should exist a sliding set of rules depending on what is being advertised? I tend to think so! If there are products that we know are bad—candy, soda, etc.—then there should be limits as to how much advertising should be allowed to go on the networks. If there is no evidence as to whether or not the items are bad, then they don’t have to be regulated.

What do you think? Treat different products differently?