When dealing with children it seems the most logical to kick the most closely at the care based theory of ethical reasoning. A theory based on love and compassion is ideal for nurturing children who are the prospective thinkers of this world. The nature of advertising however falls completely against this concept. Advertisements and media are now at the forefront of shaping our future generations. Studies have shown that one of the best ways for a child’s cognitive imagination to develop is through creative playing.
In the digital age, the amount of imaginative activities in the 8-12 age group has decreased 94% in the last several decades(Consuming Kids). The engineers who in the past spent their childhood designing and building forts and then imagining a world in which their fort turns into a castle, are now sitting in front of the TV falling scheme to companies cradle to grave consumer tactics. Dry. Allen Canner, a psychologist has been asking kids for generations what kids wanted to be when they grew up.
What he used to receive were aspirations to be a nurse or an astronaut. In the late 1 ass’s however he began to hear the response of wanting to be rich (Consuming Kids). The media had created a “profound remaking of their psyche” of what was a desirable or rewarding occupation, while being rich is not even an occupation. This can be seen in the Teen age group, which now is including kids at the young as the age of 6 where the currency of being rich is “likes”.
Girls, who tend to receive a greater amount of this youth currency mandate the need to be pretty in sexy in order to become socially rich (Consuming Kids). The generation that is supposed to receive the most care is being exploited by the advertisement industry for personal gain. By the concept of reversibility through which this theory is constructed, one would be hard pressed to find a company that would submit its control or bank accounts to child or be willing to be.
Many companies argue that it is the parents job that to control their child’s media intake. As nice as it would be to think that advertisements are simply helping us in our purchasing decisions, this is not true. Even more frightening is the fact he children believe this is the intent (Culvert, P. 214). The greatest good for the greatest number is called for by the Utility standard of ethical reasoning. Some researchers of advertising have a devilish way of disguising their intents.
There is a girl’s intelligence agency across the country that is utilized to test out products on younger female audiences. Although the kids recognized it was a “party for [them] and marketing for the company,” they are entirely unaware the cruel nature they are taught when they exploit their friends to acquire useful data for the company (Consuming Kids). Companies disguise their intent as doing “good” for a large number of girls to explore self-interests of the company. This is where corporations decision making lies faulty in regards to this theory.
The principle of virtue can be very tricky concept for many ethically based issues. Finding a medium between no advertisements towards children, and exploiting their every desire, a middle ground seems like a reasonable compromise. Eliminating child exposure to media entirely is a great concept in theory but in application is far from feasible. Even if content deemed eatable for the eyes and ears of children were eliminated, they will ultimately become exposed to adult material.
While a “perfect??’ parent may Cut Off their child’s media exposure, the reality of the matter is that the majority of parents will let their children view shows on TV and inherently the advertisements associated. However when studies are being done on “what kind of tantrums work better,” it is becoming increasingly difficult for parents to combat the corporations (Consuming Kids). A business with millions and potentially billions of dollars riding on its youth audience buying into their reduce, they are willing to dispose of millions of dollars in resources to secure its young consumers.