This just in: Advertising works.

I’ve heard a great deal of coverage of the University of Connecticut study that shows that beer advertisements make teenagers want to drink beer. The crux of it is that underage drinkers consume 1% more alcohol each month for each alcohol ad that they see on TV. (The full paper is available in January’s “Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.”) I’ve really gotten a kick out of the alcohol industry’s rebuttal which is, basically, “no it doesn’t.” Foolishness. If their advertising doesn’t result in greater sales, then why do they spend so much money on it?

Of course, our nation’s attitude towards alcohol is generally unhealthy. Rather than cease alcohol advertising — as if teenagers might forget that beer exists — the solution is to, instead, lower the drinking age and have children learn that alcohol is not something that they need to consume furtively, in great quantity, but with respect for its effects. Until such a cultural change is made, if the alcohol industry is deliberately creating advertisements to convince teenagers to consume alcohol illegally, they should be punished.

I mention this to demonstrate my ambivalence and inconsistency on the topic of media censorship and advertising. (I think it’s healthy to point out my inconsistencies.) On the one hand, I’m largely opposed to the sort of external censorship that the FCC engages in, since the television industry has shown itself to be largely capable of self-censoring. Unlike the half dozen letter-writers who were so horrified by Janet Jackson’s breast, I don’t see anything to get upset about.

On the other hand, I’m appalled at the widespread practice of marketing to audiences too young to comprehend advertising. TV-watching four year olds are bombarded by advertisements describing products, and children of this age generally cannot distinguish between fact and puffery. There’s a ginormous industry premised on convincing young children that they must have particular products. Childhood obesity alone is evidence that we’ve got a real problem here. (Along with the problem of parents who satisfy the unhealthy demands of their children.) In the abstract, I favor legal restrictions on advertisers, such that they cannot target children too young to understand what advertising is.

My beliefs are not reconcilable. But there they are.

Published by Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith (JAKE-with) is an open government technologist who lives near Char­lottes­­ville, VA, USA. more »

3 replies on “This just in: Advertising works.”

  1. One of the disturbing things I’ve found in talking to friends who were raised in the “Just Say No” era is that many of them have no concept that there is a difference between drinking and getting drunk. Funny how that never gets mentioned in hysterical news stories about the “epidemic of binge drinking.”

  2. I served on an Alcohol Task Force in college, (which at the time was a bit ironic in its own right) and I came to a similar conclusion regarding cultural change. Legislating alcohol out of existence, despite its clear dangers, is not a viable option. With anything, moderation is key. Until we teach our children that alcohol is not the forbidden fruit, they will continue to drink to excess infrequently rather than in moderate amounts perhaps more often.

    Aside from the hooligans, my time in London taught me a much more responsible view of alcohol.

  3. But advertising only works to a certain extent.

    Alcohol being associated with being cool, has more to do with teenage drinking habits than ads. It’s eliminating the mystery — the coolness — that will actually change habits.

    How many Super Bowl ads do you remember and actually act on? How many products do you try because your friends recommended it?

Comments are closed.