Lee 1 Advertising is Setting the Standard, Why Let It? Advertising is one of most influential industries in the world.

Not only is it a $250 billion per year industry covering close to a million of brands with the objective to sell, but it also is beginning to set the standards for our society. Nowadays, it is common to see advertising for all industries everywhere. In the form of posters and billboards to video advertisements to even making its way onto the big screen in the form of product placement, it is truly a massive market. Advertising is constantly changing the way we live today. From setting the standards on what we eat to how to live, advertising is behind it. The food industry is one of the most advertised industries in the world, yet it has also gotten its fair share of bad press. Today, it would be nave and against conventional wisdom to think that consuming products with high levels of fat and sugar habitually would not result in any negative health effects. Yet these very foods, that have become integral in the average Americans diet, attributes to obesity. And healthy dieting is still scarce. The tobacco and cigarette industry is another giant player in the advertising industry with enormous social and political influence. The smoking American is aware that repeated consumption of cigarettes are lethal, but he still continues. The local governments such as those in the city or county level do a great job, however it does not bring the change needed to better our lives. Many people would assume that the Federal Government, the guardian of the people, would protect its citizens from harm in the same way they do in terms of warfare. To some credibility they do, but not to the extent that they truly can. The government should seize its authority, limiting the reach of food manufactures, fast food, and tobacco industries on the American consumer to protect the health and social integrity of our everyday lives. Manufactured food and fast food has become increasingly popular and has slowly made their way into American diets. These companies are succeeding at integrating themselves as

Lee 2 essentials in the daily regimen of the American youth. The end result is adolescents and teens growing fatter and is more at risk of obesity-related diseases. An example of this is Gregory Rhymes, a 400-pound 15-year-old, who suffers from type-2 diabetes (Parloff, CR, 41). All of this due to having eaten at McDonalds nearly every day since he was 6. Gregory is not the only victim here, it is kids everywhere who have accepted fast food as well as manufactured food as their savior for fats, salts, and sugars. But its not only the fast food joints down the block that are contributing to this problem, as obesity rates are significantly higher in the schools a tenth of a mile or less from fast food (MacMillan, CR, 46). Nor is it the selection of snacks available at grocery stores that are causing this epidemic. Instead it is the fast food companies and food manufacturers becoming more aggressive just to increase their revenue. One instance of this aggressive approach is the fact they resell to schools, enabling their products to be directly sold to their consumers. This act takes away the parental guidance behind healthy dieting and encourages spending on products that will do them harm. As a commonly discussed topic in the media, it is against conventional wisdom for mature Americans to believe fast food or manufactured snacks and goods is healthy. Yet it still leaves the adolescent youth and children still unaware of the dangers of consuming such products. So from a marketing perspective it makes sense to target this nave population as a target market. In fact, according to an by Mary Story, children under the age of eight tend to view advertising as fun, entertaining, and unbiased information. She goes on to say that due to their level of cognitive development[they] are viewed by many child development researches a population vulnerable to misleading advertising. Meaning from the standpoint of the children they are psychologically helpless against such ads, as they take them at face value. Marketers on the other hand exploit this fact, trying to get children addicted at a young age, with hopes for

Lee 3 them to become repeat customers in the years to come. In doing so, they are able to create a constant and long-lasting revenue stream. To keep kids addicted to their product, marketers add toy rewards and sweepstakes prizes. In the same article by Story, there is evidence of this, as companies in the food industry [have] partnered with toy manufactures to create toys that advertise food. While trying to build a reliable customer base is no crime, getting children addicted to foods, highly unfit in terms of nutritional standards for lucrative reasons, should be. Fast food is not the only culprit of loading our kids with nutritionally unsound food. Food manufactures such as cereal makers, snack and candy producers are doing it too. By producing foods with high levels of fat and sugars, with levels that do not occur naturally, they are able to appease the primitive desire for fat and sugar in humans. Therefore it is easy for their consumers to get accustomed to consuming such levels of fat and sugar. With continued consumption, these nutritionally unfit and addictive foods lead to chronic heart disorders and contribute to obesity. As our youth deserve the opportunity to grow strong and healthy, it makes sense to ensure these fast foods never become the mantelpiece of their diet to begin with. Of course this problem takes numerous iterations to fully solve, however I am confident that our government is able to solve this issue. Fixing the way these foods are advertised is essential in solving the overall problem for a healthy diet. However this is challenging when the most popular and influential medium used to advertise is television. This cannot be any truer as 75% of US food manufacturers advertising budgets and 95% of US fast-food restaurant budgets are allocated to television (Story, CR, 23). These marketers are dedicating resources to create even more sophisticated advertisements then ever before, due to the boundless nature of television, just to get the attention of children. To make matters worse, television viewing starts early [for] US children, many between the ages

Lee 4 of 2 and 4 years view 2 hours of television daily (Story, CR, 23). As these kids are easily entertained and anxious for their show to come back, they stay engaged with whatever is displayed, even if it is advertisement. In addition to television, marketers have grown smarter, by also marketing in-schools in parallel with getting schools to sell their products. They are able to exploit schools with financial vulnerabilitydue to chronic funding shortages (Story, CR, 25), by essentially paying them. This payment is not money, however receiving free video equipment in exchange for mandatory showing of [advertised] programming in classroom sounds like they are paying for it. By choosing in-school marketing they are able to increase sales and generate product loyalty, [while] reaching large numbers of children and adolescents (Story, CR, 25) with many advantages. One of these advantages is the ability to reach large numbers of children and adolescents in a contained setting, meaning they are truly able to segment their audience and create advertisement specifically targeted for the demographics. In other words, an advertisement aimed at targeting very young children will resonate better than an advertisement created for a general audience. Marketers in addition to television and in-school marketing are also adopting online advertising. This is even a bigger problem than in school and television marketing due to the very nature of the Internet. Internet advertising is more powerful, more interactive and engaging, and smarter than any medium before it, allowing companies to seamlessly integrate advertising and Website content (Story, CR, 29). Basically, Internet is easy to do and can attract product consumers to subject themselves to even more advertising. With the limitless potential of the Internet, marketers can do things not possible without it, such as emailing a coupon for a free snack on the event of a birthday. The Internet is a powerful channel of direct communication and

Lee 5 is unmonitored unlike in school and television advertising. Therefore it should be monitored and governed by an organization with the interests of the consumer in mind. These food manufactures and fast food companies are a force to be recognized, as they have lobbying power in Washington. But we should remember that the government is an even bigger force, with the ability to seize power over these companies. Congress passed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 to combat in-school selling of manufactured snacks, despite being only a small step, nonetheless it is still a step in the right direction. Also, combating the food industry is not the only battle the US Government has faced before. In fact, Big Tobacco was combatted and triumphed over. Over $246 billion is paid over 25 years as a term of the settlement (Lavelle CR, 11). This goes to show that the paternalistic approaches used with fighting cigarettes can also be applied to Big Food. Such as the warning label from the surgeon general that constantly reinforces the fact that cigarettes are harmful, or the graphic warning labels that were signed into law with the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Wilson, CR, 17). Vice advertisers have adopted television, in-school channels, and the Internet for marketing purposes. The government should take similar approaches with tobacco as 300,000 deaths per year are now associated with overweight and obesity, according to an article by Roger Parloff, and limit the freedoms of these Big Food companies. While one may argue that it is against our free market policy for the government to do so, time and time again the government has overcome these small milestones for all for our benefit. The government should adopt similar principles from European countries as well as create some of their own to take a stand against vice marketing in terms of television advertising. The government in Sweden views advertising to children as morally and ethically unacceptable,

Lee 6 since children have difficulty distinguishing between the purpose of advertising and other modes of communication (Story, CR, 34). This policy of instituting a ban on television and radio advertising targeted at children should also be mirrored in the United States. This ban would protect those who are maturing psychologically who are not yet ready to evaluate advertising. However, it would still permit for teens and young adults, who have a better understanding of what they are consuming, to be advertised too. Ultimately, the cutting of television advertising will empower developing audiences to learn healthy dieting without the biased influence of Big Food advertisements. Children that attend public schools, institutions that are under the jurisdiction of the government, should also be protected from advertisers. By getting rid of the need for schools to do business with food companies, we can eliminate them from schools. For this to take place, the shortages experienced by schools would have to be solved, so that schools would not be forced to sell junk food to break even (Finz, CR, 65). Although the act itself is not an easy feat, it is the only way to bring healthy alternatives into the hands of students. In my opinion, if schools encouraged healthier dieting in addition to offering it, students would take it upon themselves to do so. Internet advertising would be an entirely different scenario; due to the fact one country is not the governing body for the Internet. But does that matter? The United States passed the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act in 1998, creating restrictions for marketers to collect personal data for children under 13. That was over a decade ago, but is it too late to extend this power? Not only are those under the age of 13 being shielded from advertisers, which is an amazing feat for the paternalistic government, but it would also make sense to rid the Internet of advertisement aimed at those under 13 as well. By enforcing stricter rules on the Internet, the government can truly protect its future generations.

Lee 7 It is heretical desire to stop the act of advertising. But it should be the desires of Americans to stop advertising to children, an audience that cannot mentally process them. Not does advertising lead the younger generations of Americans to make bad decisions in terms of what they eat and how they eat, it essentially corrupts them at a young age. This vice marketing does not allow for children to truly discover the benefits of healthy dieting, instead craving the sugary fatty foods that are processed for their detriment. Whether it is through the television, the biggest source of entertainment today, through schools, a mandatory institution that all children bear with, or through the Internet, a connection to the world, the works of advertisers specifically targeting the young do not belong there. While the collective efforts of many concerned parents, cities, and counties have brought change, it is not to the scale that the government can bring. I believe a government whose fundamental philosophy was to rid themselves from despotic rule can very easily overcome an industry such as vice marketing.

Lee 8 Works Cited "Children, Adolescents, and Advertising." Pediatrics. 118.6 (2006): 1-4. Print. Finz, Stacy. "Some Schools, Students Make a Hash of Antijunk Food Law." SFGate.com San Francisco Chronicle 28 Sept 2007, Print. Lavelle, Marianne. "Teen Tobacco Wars: An Antismoking Ad Blitz vs. New Cigarette Marketing Ploys." U.S. News & World Report 30 Jan 2000, Print. MacMillan, Douglas. "Alcohol, Then Tobacco. Now Fast Food?." Bloomberg Businessweek 20 Jun 2009, Print Parloff, Roger. "Is Fat the Next Tobacco? For Big Food, the Supersizing of America is Becoming a Big Headache." CNN Money 03 Feb 2003, Print. Wilson, Duff. "U.S. Releases Graphic Images to Deter Smokers." New York Times 21 Jun 2011, Print. Story, Mary, and Simone French. "Food Advertising and Marketing Directed at Children and Adolescents in the U.S.." International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 1.BioMed Central (2004): 1-15. Print.