是否禁止面向儿童的广告Banning Advertising Aimed at Children

It is often argued that children should not be advertised to at all. I agree with this where young children are concerned, but I believe regulation is a better answer for older ones. The case for protecting young children is strong. Below about seven, a child does not reliably understand that an advertisement is trying to sell something. To that child, a cheerful film about a sugary drink is simply part of the programme, and the usual defence of advertising, that adults can judge it for themselves, does not apply. Selling to someone who cannot recognise that they are being sold to is difficult to justify. There is also the question of what is advertised. Food high in sugar and salt, and toys far beyond what many families can afford, make up a large share of it. The result is pressure inside the home: children ask, parents refuse, and the argument that follows is one the advertiser never has to witness. Poorer families feel this most sharply. A complete ban, however, would be clumsy. A fifteen-year-old can recognise persuasion and will meet far more of it as an adult; shielding them entirely prepares them for nothing. Much of the free content young people use is paid for by advertising, and removing it would simply move the cost to families. In conclusion, I support banning advertisements directed at young children, who cannot understand what is being done to them. For older children, strict rules on what may be advertised, combined with teaching them how persuasion works, would achieve more than a ban.