Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
The way in which children perceive and react to marketing communications is influenced by the age and the experience of the child and the context in which the message is delivered. Marketing communications addressed to, targeted directly at or featuring children must not exploit their credulity, loyalty, vulnerability or lack of experience (Rule 5.2) by, for example, making them feel inferior for not buying, or encouraging others to buy, the advertised product (Rule 5.2.1). In addition to the general rules in Section 5, Section 15 includes specific rules in relation to advertising food to children: marcoms must neither try to sell to children by directly appealing to emotions such as pity, fear or self-confidence nor suggest that having the advertised product somehow confers superiority (Rule 15.16.1). They must not urge children to buy or persuade others to buy and must avoid high-pressure or hard-sell techniques, and must not suggest that children could be bullied, cajoled or otherwise put under pressure to buy the advertised item (Rule 15.16.2).
An ad by Procter & Gamble showed a seemingly unpopular boy who had no need for the advertiser’s Sunny D drink because he liked fresh fruit and vegetables. The ASA concluded that the ad did not breach the Code because readers were unlikely to interpret the ad as meaning the boy had no friends because he did not drink the advertised product (Procter & Gamble UK, 18 February 2004). But marketers should be wary of stating or implying a causal link between a child’s popularity (or ‘coolness’) and the product on sale.
The ASA upheld a complaint about a mailing sent to a 7 year old, “inviting” him to come to a theme park. Because the mailing was unsolicited and sent to a child incapable of understanding it was a marketing communication and not an invitation to a birthday party, the ASA considered that approach was likely to mislead recipients (The M&D Group, 19 March 2003). In 2006, the ASA rejected complaints that a mock-up of a children’s birthday party invitation could confuse children about the nature of the ad. Because it was an insert in lifestyle magazines and national press supplements, the ASA considered the charity fund-raising leaflet was unlikely to exploit children’s credulity or distress them (NSPCC, 22 November 2006). See ‘Children: Targeting’.
Marketers should not encourage children to make a nuisance of themselves (Rule 5.4.1). In 2006, the ASA received complaints that a poster encouraged children to exert so-called ‘pester power’. The ASA upheld a complaint that a poster could encourage pester power. The headline, when read in isolation, implied to children that the Disney Channel was available to all. Because it was not and because children were unlikely to understand that it was available only to subscribers, the ASA considered the poster breached the Code (Disney Channel UK, 8 November 2006).
Children should be able to grasp the main characteristics of the product (for example, its performance or functionality) or promotion (for example, understand the likelihood of winning a prize) and distinguish between real-life and fantasy. Where necessary, children should get adult permission (for example, before agreeing to buy costly goods or entering a competition the prize for which might cause conflict, such as animals or holidays). The ASA has ruled against marcoms for products, such as mobile phone downloads, if the cost (and in some cases, the on-going cost) has not been clear to the audience addressed (Walt Disney Company Ltd, 10 October 2007). Phrases such as “join the club” have been considered inadequate to convey to young audiences a long-term commitment. See ‘Children: Money’.
The ASA concluded that the promoters of a website competition intended for 12 to 18 year olds had not dealt fairly and honourably with entrants because they announced they were extending the closing date by three months and then changed their minds. The ASA criticised the promoters for not taking into account the level of understanding and expectation of the target audience and told them to take more care when addressing competitions to children (Bandwagon Digital, 25 July 2007).
Last modified : 11 February 2012