The first draft

<The first draft>

 From the perspective of advertisers, children are a kind of appealing clients to target. They like to watch television, can be blinded by the optical and auditory contents of advertisements easily, and also be sensitive to the latest toys and fast foods. Due to these characteristics of children, governments of the U.K., Denmark, Belgium, and Greece restricts level of advertisements aimed at children. Moreover, in Quebec, Sweden, and Norway, it is illegal to advertise targeting to children under 12.

  The advertising industry invests 12 billion dollars per year to product advertisements aimed at children which contains persuasive sugarcoated words especially on TV. According to studies, a child is exposed to 40000 television advertisements a year averagely. They urge children to ask their parents to buy. Parents who take the monetary power, however, get mad at the "Children marketing" because it induces a burden to comply with the requirement. Therefore, I suggest that advertisements aimed at children should be banned.

 First, we should check the influences of advertisements on children. Thomas Robinson, a professor of pediatrics at Stanford University and Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, adverted that “even a 30-second exposure to a novel product, one that you’ve never seen before, changes their preferences for brand.” after his experiments with preschoolers. 

 For example, Stanford University's associate professor of pediatircs, Dr. Tom N. Robinson  provided two portions of identical food sets to children who were 3- to 5-year-old which one was wrapped with McDonald's and the other was ordinary one and asked them to choose more delicious one. The result was that most of them said the set which was wrapped McDonald's tasted better.

 Like this, advertisements can inculcate wrong impression on children and emphasize values on brand name and materialistic joys.

 There can be opinion the ban of advertising can cause business recession of corporations. However, they have to recognize that those who hold powers to consume are parents, not the six-year-old children. The advertiser's should persuade the parents first, that the product is worth to get for their kids.

 It is true that ban of the advertisement can be happened suddenly overnight, thinking realistically. So I admit there should be regulations of parents for their children. They should teach them what commercials are, including their purposes and what they say isn't always truth. Deborah Regan Howe, a mother of two in Buffalo, New York, helps her six-year-old son to improve understanding of marketing by talking about purposes of advertisements with him. She says, 

. “We talk about why children in ads look happy and what the toys might be like in reality. He still asks me for the latest thing, but there is no battle. He understands why if he doesn't get it.”

 As, I want to be ad-maker in future, I think advertisement is important and should be considered as a kind of arts. However, what is important to know is that it can be valid when consumers can judge the advertisements themselves in my opinion. Instead of seducing children who are vulnerable to judge what is right and wrong to buy the products, advertiser's should persuade parents that it is worthy of buying for their kids and then only the advertisements can have value of advertisements themselves.