This case study examines the ethical dimensions of advertising to children and youth, with particular focus on whether schools should permit commercial advertising on campus. The paper analyzes key stakeholders—companies, children, parents, and communities—and their competing interests. It evaluates both the financial benefits of school-based advertising (addressing budget shortfalls) and the risks of exploitation in captive audiences. The analysis distinguishes between general youth marketing and school-specific advertising, noting children's vulnerability when parental oversight is absent. The paper concludes by presenting cause-related marketing as an ethical alternative that allows schools to generate revenue while supporting community values and child welfare.
This case study focuses on the age at which young people should be exposed to media advertising in general and whether such advertising should be allowed in schools in particular. A significant concern is that direct spending by young people—as young as 4 years old—has increased dramatically in recent years, with current trends suggesting this growth will continue into the foreseeable future. Understanding the ethical implications of marketing to this demographic is essential for parents, educators, and policymakers.
The question of whether there is an appropriate age for advertising requires examining marketer responsibility. Currently, the only consideration marketers apply with respect to age is fine-tuning their messages for their age-related target market. The argument presented here is that it is the responsibility of parents to screen these messages rather than the responsibility of marketers to avoid advertising to a specific age group. This perspective shifts the burden of protection to families rather than the marketing industry itself.
Multiple stakeholder groups are impacted by decisions regarding youth-directed advertising. The primary stakeholders include the companies advertising to young people, the young people themselves, their parents, and the larger communities in which they live, work, and raise their children. Each group has distinct interests and stands to be affected differently by policies permitting or restricting school-based advertising.
The primary benefit of permitting advertising in schools is the additional revenue this practice generates. Schools operate on razor-thin budgets, and many states have implemented lotteries to supplement educational funding. However, a concerning finding is that lottery revenues have often replaced tax funding rather than supplementing it, disappointing taxpayers who expected genuine budget increases. Depending on the product and approach, the main drawback of advertising within schools is the potential for young people to be exploited by school systems eager to earn the extra revenues. Schools may prioritize financial gain over student welfare, creating an ethical conflict of interest.
"Questioning assumptions about child purchasing power"
"Community partnerships enable ethical revenue generation"
You’re 39% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.