Introduction
There are business transactions that were reported to have been undertaken without due adherence to ethical standards. Business ethics has been regarded as essential in each and every dealing to avoid animosity and conflicts. One of the ethical dilemmas that continue to pervade contemporary settings pertain to marketing to children. In an article entitled ‘Marketing to Children: Accepting Responsibility’ written by O'Brien (2011), the author presented ethical concerns regarding the need to assume due responsibility and accountability for some advertisements that are directed to children. As evident, some of the advertisements, especially those promoted by fast food chains like McDonalds eventually lead to unhealthy behavior and could eventually lead to the development of childhood obesity. Likewise, continued exposure to these kinds of advertisments have the potentials of ingraining incorrect values, like offering food, which could indeed be tasty, but unsafe. Food offered by fast food chains normally contain ingredients that could increase preponderance to the development of illnesses. The current discourse hereby aims to expound on the ethical dilemma of marketing to children in greater depth and detail. As such, the ethical dilemma would be described through varied contexts and where arguments from different perspectives would be determined. Likewise, the potential solutions to the dilemma would be presented including the impact that ethical relativism and globalization may have on the suggested resolution. Finally, a selection of the best solution and rationale for the decision made would be explained, prior to the concluding portion which would highlight the relevant points that were discussed.
The Ethical Dilemma
The Consumers International (CI) has reportedly recognized that there is a need to
establish guidelines as well as an international code which would guide advertisers and marketers in promoting products or services directed to children. Children as target audience were allegedly defined as being comprised of the segment of the children population who are under 12 years of age, which, likewise comprise only as much as 50% of the entire children population. In another discourse, child-directed marketing was described as marketing efforts intended for children from childbirth until the age of 14 . As such, there are still more children who are wantonly exposed to advertisements and continued exposure have allegedly contributed to health dilemmas, specifically obesity .
The ethical dilemma is noted to be magnified by the reported impact of child-directed marketing on lifestyle, behavior, and health. As documented in various studies, children who were constantly exposed to marketing and advertising promotional activities tend to exhibit poor dietary intake due to consumption of food high in calories, sodium, saturated fat, and less in fiber – leading to excess weight gain and eventually, obesity . Moreover, in a number of surveyed organizations classified as producing and marketing foods which are identified to be tasty, yet unhealthy, there were those which do not possess any explicit policy to adhere to guidelines and recommendations regarding marketing to children . These organizations were identified as follows: Taco Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut. Concurrently, McDonalds was reported to pledge commitment to adhere to regulations on child-directed marketing only in the United States and in Canada. A global policy is deemed wanting to be enforced given that McDonalds operates in various countries all over the world.
Promoters of products directed to children, especially the Happy Meal of McDonalds, allegedly respond by insinuating that it is up to the parents’ responsibility and right to select what food options to provide to their children. As such, there is an ethical dilemma in enforcing restrictions for marketing to children. The food manufacturers (like McDonald’s) aim to advertise the products to earn substantial profits. The government earn from taxes paid by fastfood chains, like McDonald’s. The responsibility for providing health food choices were rationalized by fastfood chains as soley coming from the parents, and that they are free to advertise and promote their products on a self-regulation basis (O'Brien, 2011).
Potential Solutions to the Dilemma
As noted, coming from manufacturers and marketers of food products directed to children, the effort to restrict consumption of these food items should come from the parents. If and when parents would instill the correct values to children regarding diet and nutritional food intake, as well as manage the media which promotes child-directed marketing, then, the children would be prevented from being exposed to identified health hazards.
On the part of the school or academic institutions, the administrative system should integrate the essential theoretical framework for good nutrition at the onset and make the children aware that despite the proliferation of child-directed marketing, that there are food items to avoid. Moreover, local community members, through food establishments (retail stores or wholesale insitutions) can provide signs, warnings, and other educational materials that would highlight the unsafe or unhealthy ingredients in foods that are risky for children to consume.
Finally, health governing bodies and the federal government should develop more stringent policies to regulate and restrict child-directed marketing by adhering to proposed guidelines recommended by the CI and the Institute of Medicine (IOM), among others.
Impact that Ethical Relativism and Globalization May Have on the Suggested Dilemma Resolution
The theory of ethical relativism asserts that there are no universal or absolute truths in the field of ethics since the aspect of morality differs according to person or depending on cultural or societal underpinnings. As such, proposing that health regulatory bodies or the federal government should impose policies and restrictions on child-directed marketing could not be construed as universally or globally acceptable. The fact that McDonald’s commitment for adherence to guidelines regarding marketing to children covers only the U.S. and Canada attest to the application of ethical relativism theory.
The same is true for the concept of globalization. Although, fast food chains such as McDonalds, Pizza Hut, Dunkin Donuts, KFC, and others, have established branches globally, the policies and procedures, as well as adherence to guidelines on child-directed marketing still depends on the local laws and regulations imposed in each country where these organizations operate. In the United States and Canada for instance, the fact that McDonald’s had pledged commitment to adhere to guidelines regarding marketing to children attest to the stringent monitoring of consumer advocates for children’s rights and welfare. In other countries, McDonald’s might just be waiting for health regulatory agencies and respective governments to impose strict adherence to child-directed marketing in their respective countries before any restrictions could be imposed.
Selection of the Best Solution and Rationale
The traditional ethical theories that could be used as potential resolution to the ethical dilemmas are the utilitarian theory: actions that ensure that the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people should be paramount; as well as the deonthological theory, or the morality of one’s action would be based on adherence to rules . Various advocates for children’s welfare have unilaterally proposed a total ban of marketing or advertising to children. However, the move could be rationalized as beneficial to the children, as a whole; but detrimental to business organizations who pay taxes to the governnment. One could surmise that these are large organizations that contribute to the generation of taxes which is needed by the government to spur continued economic growth. Thus, curtailing them to market their products, especially to a large segment, the children, would signficantly impact the amount of earnings that is needed to sustain economic development.
As such, in the end, the bottom line appears to be relying on the discretion and vigilance of parents, as well as educators, whose duties are to promote and adhere to healthy food options, to be incalcated to children at very early stages of development and growth. If and when appropriate theoretical frameworks on healthy lifestyle, good nutrition, and physical fitness are imbibed, then children would be able to prevent consuming items that are known to impinge on their health and could risk causing chronic illnesses, such as obesity.
Conclusion
Marketing to children has been specifically identified as posing ethical dilemma due to
subsequent health risks that continued exposure to advertisements and promotional campaigns could incur. The exploration of the child-directed marketing has paved the way for greater understanding on the negative effects that these advertisements do to the minds of young children and the repercussive impact on their future. The risks of contracting childhood obesity are only one among other health dilemma that child-directed marketing generates. As such, identifying who is responsible and accountable for restricting the exposure of these child-directed marketing remains to be a controversial ethical problem in contemporary times.
A review of the potential solutions to the ethical problem was evaluated from the perspectives of parents, educators, local community members, health governing bodies, and the federal government. Likewise, these possible solutions were further assessed using theories of ethical relativism and globalization. After taking into account the pros and cons of alternative courses of action from these various points of views, it is apparently construed that the best course of action is still focusing on grassroots approach; meaning, focusing on ingraining the most appropriate values of good health to children at the onset – by parents and educators. However, other participants to the ethical dilemma, the food manufacturers and marketers, local community members, consumer advocates, health organizations and the government, should work hand in hand to ensure that the future of the children would be made safe from health-related risks through responsible marketing efforts.
References
Consumer International. (2009, March). Left wanting more. Retrieved from consumerinternational.org: http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/540105/left_wanting_more.pdf
Got Questions Ministries. (2016). How does deontological ethics define morality? What is deontology? Retrieved from compelling truth: http://www.compellingtruth.org/deontology.html
O'Brien, G. (2011, May 31). Marketing to Children: Accepting Responsibility. Retrieved from business-ethics.com: http://business-ethics.com/2011/05/31/1441-marketing-to-children-accepting-responsibility/
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2015). Recommendations for Responsible Food Marketing to Children. Retrieved from healthyeatingresearch.org: http://healthyeatingresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/HER_Food-Marketing-Recomm_1-2015.pdf
