Argument Analysis: Marketing to Children Essay

Marketing has always targeted children because they are easy to influence. If you ask a kid where they want to eat, they always pick the place that gives out toys over the place that is actually better for them. This is the result of advertising to children, but, are we holding the right people responsible for the children’s choices. Yes, marketing is a considerable issue on our youth however there are factors that most leave out. The article The Ethics of Food Advertising Targeted Toward Children: Parental Viewpoint touches on how advertising in the market directly effects children’s unhealthy food choices and is centered around the parents’ ethical views of advertising food for children. This article uses statistical evidence to prove just that, that the market is affecting the health of children on a global scale. The article then turns to how some are tackling this issue with bans and regulations on advertising to our youth. The rest of the article is about a survey completed by parents to further prove their viewpoint on the effects that advertising has on children. The four main points of parents’ attitude toward food advertising according to the survey are: there is too much advertising directed at children, advertisers deceive children to buy their products, there is too much sugar in the foods being advertised, and that advertising teaches children bad eating habits. Additionally, the statistics offer considerable concern about obesity, in showing that roughly 50% of elementary-school children and 80% of teenagers will encounter obesity. Due to the statistical evidence provided parents have become increasingly concerned on how marketers have been conducting ethical practices in promoting their products. They go as far to blame the markets for the increased levels of childhood obesity. The survey that is conducted in the article looks further into the parental views of the situation. The first main point of the survey is that there is too much advertising directed at children. According to the facts in the article, in 2005 food and beverage companies in the US spent around 11 billion on advertising targeting children and adolescents and there are around 7,600 commercials on unhealthy food in any given year. In attempt to lower the numbers some governments in European countries have even introduced stricter laws on food advertising. This however has not significantly changed marketing toward children and therefore cannot support the issue at hand. The last few points are not valid arguments because they are attacking the marketing techniques for the way children eat when in all reality the parents are the ones that control the way their children eat. The first point is that advertisers deceive children with the use of tricks and gimmicks to get them to buy their products. This is not a valid argument considering parents are the ones that initially buy the products. The advertising does get the children to want or desire the products being advertised, but the parents are the ones that are going through with the purchase. The parents are the ones giving in and letting the advertisements guide the way their children eat. Like I said earlier if you give a child the choice between a healthy cereal and one with a toy in the package, they are more than likely to choose the cereal with the toy. This is where the parents should step in and not give them that choice. The best way to let the child decide which cereal they want while still getting a healthy cereal is to hold up two different healthy cereals and ask them to choose between the two. Children learn bad eating habits from advertising and the advertised foods contain too much sugar are the next couple of points. However, attacking advertisements for our children’s eating habits doesn’t help our children’s eating habits, it merely gives us something to hold responsible instead of looking into the actual problem itself. Advertising is an important aspect in everyday life, and it does curve our outlook on what we would like to purchase. But, to hold them responsible for what we do is ridiculous. Children are going to eat what we serve them, even if that means we are too lazy to make a meal so we run to Mickey D’s. We can blame McDonalds for our children becoming obese although it will never stop them from becoming unhealthy. Only we can make the right choices to help our children stay healthy. Overall this whole article explains how advertising to children affect what they eat in a parental perspective. However, parents don’t consider the whole picture and they insist on holding the marketers responsible for what their children eat. When the actual parents are the ones that control what their children eat, and with a little guidance their children can control what they eat healthfully.