The Price of Child Marketing

What price will we pay for instilling consumerism in our young? That is the question I ask myself every time I see an ad on TV targeting children in their tender years. This is as unethical and immoral a marketing manoeuvre as can be offered. Brilliant as it might be in commercial terms; this strategy of generating long-term consumers by robbing children of their childhood is a monstrous thing.

What need does a 6-year-old have of owning a mobile phone? None, I tell you, but the one generated by marketing and publicity. The same is true for young girls of 10, who truly shouldn’t be concerned about make-up, high heel shoes and “clothes that make her look thin and fashionable”. These and many other things are artificial necessities instilled into our children through the media and viral marketing to foment sales and benefit manufacturers of items not generally desired by children.

If you are not yet convinced, think of the foods your children seek out in the supermarket. How often have you seen your child pick up an orange or an apple? How many fruits and vegetables is your infant able to recognise and call by name? Yet, there are very few children who cannot recognise the brands and names of snacks and dainties; even the most obscure ones. This is a natural thing when you consider that they are bombarded by ads on TV telling them how “fun and delicious” it is to stuff themselves with tonnes of sugar, salt and fat.

It is undeniable that marketers and publicists play on the guilt of parents who have little time to spend with their children in the midst of the pressures of modern life. It is undeniable that it works. However, the short-term consequences of this marketing strategy is the generation of spoilt children, whose exacerbated consumerism is a thing that both destroys their childhood and values and also makes them unhappy insatiable addicts to buying things they never even enjoy. This is a sad situation, but the more ominous threat is in the long-term.

The long-term effect is indeed to manufacture insatiable consumers who try to quench the need for affection and self affirmation through the spending of money, but there is more: We are making inconsequential people who will be utterly unhappy with their meaningless lives of consumption and who will not know how to manage their disappointment. We are making adults who will be incapable of dealing with frustration, and who will react destructively about it. They will not know that they must restrain themselves from wanting what others are not willing to give, so they will shout at, strike and harm the objects of their frustration. They will be acting like children in tantrums; yet, they will be full grown adults with all of an adult’s power. This is something heartily to be avoided.

Since greed prevents marketers and administrators from exercising restraint in this unethical targeting of children with marketing campaigns, it is up to parents to impose some restraint on their children for their own benefit. It is, as it always was, ultimately the duty of a parent to offer their kids values greater and more fulfilling than mere consumerism. Give them love, and give them principles and give them the occasion to use and develop their imagination without the TV and electronic toys that play on their own. They may cry now, when you deny them that day’s new toy and that meal’s triple-chocolate muffin with some cartoon character’s face stamped on it, but tomorrow they will thank you for their healthy bodies and their free-thinking minds. Give them that opportunity.

Corporative Self-Destruction

My reflection today is on the moronic Human Resources policies of the large global corporations. I say they are idiotic because of the inherent myopia of widespread HR policies that aim at short-term savings in the value of salaries and lawful benefits awarded to their veteran employees. For several years, corporations have been employing a policy of dismissing expensive veteran employees to replace them with younger and cheaper newly graduated professionals.

The explanation offered for this self-destructive strategy is generally that the younger professional is theoretically up to date with market practices, tendencies and, though they require indoctrination and training in corporate culture, they should be just as capable as the veteran employee, who often needs theoretical recycling. This is all good and it all makes sense; at least on paper.

However, the practical reality of the matter is quite different. The CV of the newly graduated professional may reflect curricular proficiency, but the theoretical content of his/her education is no substitute for practical experience in the field. What an HR officer calls “vices” on the veteran employee, many executives call “savvy” or “wisdom”. To make matters worst, corporations are downsizing departments and handing the work volume of 2-3 veteran professionals into the care of a single novice. Downsizing and substituting an experienced veteran for a novice to save on the cost of the employee (salary + benefits) may seem smart on the short-term, but the long-term consequences are dire for corporations. Among them, we have:

1. An increase of mistakes in operations caused by the lack of practical experience and by ill dimensioned volume of work
2. An increase of operational costs caused by the above-mentioned inexperience
3. An increase of insecurity among employees, who are afraid to be laid-off at any time
4. Lack of loyalty to the corporation, as a result of the above-mentioned insecurity
5. An increase of information security problems as a result of the lack of loyalty
6. An increase of the incidence of sabotage as a result of dissatisfaction in the ranks
7. An adverse and unproductive working environment, where employees are busier tending the keeping of their position (covering-up mistakes etc.) than they are working towards corporate objectives

It is quite clear that given all of the aspects listed above, any savings conquered with the erroneous HR policies in effect today will result in palpable operational losses that will affect Marketing and Industrial costs negatively. Therefore, if there is any savings to be made in these destructive HR policies, such values will surely be supplanted by the losses incurred as a direct result of the same disastrous HR policies.

It is my opinion that, should HR departments persist is their wanton ways, they shall be responsible for a negative revolution in the way professionals deal with their employers. Better results should be obtained by providing competent professionals with security and peace of mind with which to develop their working potential, and by paying professionals what they are actually worth. It is past the time of maximisation of profits and time now for sustainable working relationships.